Enable parallel building for ocaml-4.08 and above. tested as:
$ nix build -f. ocaml-ng.ocamlPackages_{4_{00_1,01_0,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,13},latest}.ocaml --keep-going
ocaml build system supports parallel building, but but for multiple
top-level targets at the same time as it usually spawns subprocess
$(MAKE) that occasionally conflict with one another. To work it around
we use tiny Makefile with a single rule that calls top-level targets
sequentially as makefile calls:
nixpkgs_world_bootstrap_world_opt:
$(MAKE) world
$(MAKE) bootstrap
$(MAKE) world.opt
On a 16-core machine ocaml-4.12 build speeds up from 6m55s to 1m35s.
Releases 4_00_1, 4_01_0, 4_04 and 4_05 still have some race in them.
Thus this change enables parallel builds only for ocaml-4.06 and above.
Adapted from #142723
upstreams's CI tests the parallel makefile: https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/issues/10235#issuecomment-782100584
The limit was chosen to be 4.08 because it was released in 2019, not too
long before the above link.
The configure program for OCaml has been using a new set of command-line
arguments from version 4.08. This is a small refactoring to ease dealing with
the two sets.
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
(cherry picked from commit ba52ae5048)
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
Many (less easily automatically converted) old-style strings
remain.
Where there was any possible ambiguity about the exact version or
variant intended, nothing was changed. IANAL, nor a search robot.
Use `with stdenv.lib` wherever it makes sense.
(My OCD kicked in today...)
Remove repeated package names, capitalize first word, remove trailing
periods and move overlong descriptions to longDescription.
I also simplified some descriptions as well, when they were particularly
long or technical, often based on Arch Linux' package descriptions.
I've tried to stay away from generated expressions (and I think I
succeeded).
Some specifics worth mentioning:
* cron, has "Vixie Cron" in its description. The "Vixie" part is not
mentioned anywhere else. I kept it in a parenthesis at the end of the
description.
* ctags description started with "Exuberant Ctags ...", and the
"exuberant" part is not mentioned elsewhere. Kept it in a parenthesis
at the end of description.
* nix has the description "The Nix Deployment System". Since that
doesn't really say much what it is/does (especially after removing
the package name!), I changed that to "Powerful package manager that
makes package management reliable and reproducible" (borrowed from
nixos.org).
* Tons of "GNU Foo, Foo is a [the important bits]" descriptions
is changed to just [the important bits]. If the package name doesn't
contain GNU I don't think it's needed to say it in the description
either.
Anders Kaseorg