From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun May 08 18:15:00 2022 Received: (at 55283) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 May 2022 22:15:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55482 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nnpB6-0001ZZ-FB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 May 2022 18:15:00 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56394) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nnpB4-0001ZN-Tg for 55283@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 May 2022 18:14:59 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:40266) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nnpAy-0001Ud-NZ; Sun, 08 May 2022 18:14:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=Q2iGodT7PhpZk6SGd+Llq/JPngkwpc8z8eJwcrlp30k=; b=R+cB6JWL82pnVsG+EbcM +OOEbIujbbKTxXokHj8iOmbFs7g7floYVuyc52iAjCY9oELhQFJw1mCPRYPb4hKUcQ33dTT+8PBTV e6zLgiA2axOLhCDn4UWtkNArvI5li1OKMn8D4ueNv+gCFBervGkmGsrCZpUxMfLHSUJtTeDrisP81 ODW0Kjgowz6civTLDhaa8XlolhdHpfYe0H2rdhiMZsx2fg/OPMO61B/Zx89SIrBwAhQC1zxprv+79 Yp4N7ukIUkhbVmPYcR0D/a5gISIxQZyViV3nQBBIwNJdi05Fg9ouA5G8QNCg5CEgJ9Bznpf7TPdf9 q/hYQrDlfXrgbw==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:59437 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nnpAy-00028g-BF; Sun, 08 May 2022 18:14:52 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Vagrant Cascadian Subject: Re: bug#55283: =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98tests=2Fguix-shell-export-manif?= =?utf-8?Q?est=2Esh=E2=80=99?= fails on aarch64-linux References: <87ee1761ci.fsf@inria.fr> <20220506022826.5089eb2c@riseup.net> <5d219586c7a9a5ed2d89b12db73385d9d55adeb9.camel@telenet.be> <871qx68g33.fsf@contorta> <87wney6vwq.fsf@contorta> Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 00:14:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87wney6vwq.fsf@contorta> (Vagrant Cascadian's message of "Fri, 06 May 2022 17:14:45 -0700") Message-ID: <87wnevu0x1.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 55283 Cc: 55283@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos , raingloom X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi! Vagrant Cascadian skribis: > Well, I guess I answered my initial question by reading the error > message... guix/cpu.scm ... how did that work before for things like > cross-building, where /proc/cpuinfo is *definitely* wrong to get > information about the architecture you're building for? (guix cpu) is used when passing =E2=80=98--tune=E2=80=99, which is used for= native builds: https://hpc.guix.info/blog/2022/01/tuning-packages-for-a-cpu-micro-archit= ecture/ Ludo=E2=80=99.