I figure it's a simple typo. This test expects entries `"a"`, `"b"`, `"c"`, `"d"` to be lexicographically sorted but fails. The actual result is that entries are sorted in this order: `c, b, a, d`. This is because the test adds the entry `"b" = lib.dag.entry.between [ "c" ] [ "a" ] "b"`, i.e. after `"c"` and before `"a"`. I haven't checked if it was a logic error in the sort implementation, as other pieces of labs rely on it (and use `lib.dag.entry.between` with the arguments flipped relative to the test, which makes sense), and the arguments of the function `lib.dag.entry.between` are named "after", *then* "before".
Co-authored-by: Austreelis <dev.austreelis@swhaele.net>
Reviewed-on: #9
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Austreelis <austreelis@noreply.git.auxolotl.org>
Co-committed-by: Austreelis <austreelis@noreply.git.auxolotl.org>
Work in progress cross compiler for x86_64. I've managed to get a full x86_64 gcc using the binaries built from foundation, and am working on implementing their builds into tidepool.
### Bootstrapping steps
0) Start with i686 tools (gcc, binutils, musl, etc)
1) Build binutils targeting x86_64-linux
2) Build a minimal gcc cross compiler using the cross binutils. This minimal cross compiler does not have support for libc, so is pretty much only useful for building musl or glibc.
3) Use the minimal cross compiler to build x86_64-linux glibc or musl
4) Now that we have a cross compiler and x86_64-linux libc, we can build gcc for the target architecture!
5) Profit! We can now build anything x86_64 using our gcc compiler!
Co-authored-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Reviewed-on: #8
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Victor Fuentes <vmfuentes64@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Victor Fuentes <vmfuentes64@gmail.com>
"`lib.types.derivations.shell` uses `lib.packages.isDerivation` but didn't passed an argument, making code using it fail with `error: value is a function while a Boolean was expected`"
Co-authored-by: Austreelis <dev@austreelis.net>
Reviewed-on: #7
Reviewed-by: isabel roses <isabel@isabelroses.com>
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Austreelis <austreelis@noreply.git.auxolotl.org>
Co-committed-by: Austreelis <austreelis@noreply.git.auxolotl.org>
I am 0.8 sure this is a typo, I've never seen this being referred to as topographic sorting!
Reviewed-on: #5
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Alex Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
Make 'missing' executable where source tarballs use autotools and are unpacked with untar. untar doesn't preserve or set mtime, which may result in autotools generated files, e.g. configure, having newer timestamps than their source files (e.g. configure.in.) In these circumstances autotools generated Makefiles will call 'missing' to either regenerate them or fix-up the timestamps.
Reviewed-on: #4
Reviewed-by: isabel roses <isabel@isabelroses.com>
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Steve Dodd <steved424@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Steve Dodd <steved424@gmail.com>
I must confess to not understanding quite how all this works, but this seems to solve the problem of aarch64 fetching the x86-64 binary and vice-versa.
Reviewed-on: #2
Reviewed-by: Jake Hamilton <jake.hamilton@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Steve Dodd <steved424@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Steve Dodd <steved424@gmail.com>
