Yes, and in fact I've nearly finished working towards it, now that YoWASP includes yosys-smtbmc and sby. But I'm open to other options.

(You might find it useful to know that sby is developed in lockstep with Yosys itself and it should in fact be installed not as a separate package but as a component of the feature complete Yosys package.)

I realized the CI takes a lot of time to run because it builds yosys every time.

(Also, you probably know this, but it uses ccache so it doesn't build Yosys every time from scratch. It does rebuild large parts of it or the whole thing often enough that it's annoying, though.)

Well, I have a arch repo which rebuilds yosys daily, that would be my proposal. But as you develop yowasp I guess you'll probably go for it instead, as you have more control.

If you go with my arch repo, you can always blame things breaking on me 😄

(You might find it useful to know that sby is developed in lockstep with Yosys itself and it should in fact be installed not as a separate package but as a component of the feature complete Yosys package.)

From my packager POV I think it should be a different package. I can lock in dependencies, and these two are packages that should be really close together, you explained why. I am open to argue this though.

(Also, you probably know this, but it uses ccache so it doesn't build Yosys every time from scratch. It does rebuild large parts of it or the whole thing often enough that it's annoying, though.)

Yeah. Just the linking on a weak cpu takes a long time 😅 and that would always be needed, even if ccache can provide every object.

Well, I have a arch repo which rebuilds yosys daily, that would be my proposal.

Both Travis and GH Actions use Ubuntu or something, right?

But as you develop yowasp I guess you'll probably go for it instead, as you have more control.

There's actually little difference for me, I just dislike Linux packaging in general, and since I already need YoWASP for other things, might as well do that. YoWASP can be quite slow, too.

I can lock in dependencies, and these two are packages that should be really close together, you explained why. I am open to argue this though.

Well, the main argument I have is that sby (normally) installs into Yosys data directory. But if they're locked together then I don't really care one way or another. Maybe sby can recommend some SAT solvers and that's easier to do as a separate package.

Both Travis and GH Actions use Ubuntu or something, right?

You can use a docker container.

Example: https://github.com/FFY00/dbus-objects/blob/master/.github/workflows/doc.yml

I just dislike Linux packaging in general

I wonder if I could change your mind, I thought the same before arch. I've recently tried packaging for other distributions (mainly fedora) and I did not have a great experience, I could blame it on my lack of knowledge about the build system but arch had a much better experience getting started anyway. It has a pretty mild learning curve IMO.

It's all bash, pretty straight forward. This is what it takes to package a stable yosys: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/yosys

There is also a pretty great environment for reproducibility. I build everything in a clean chroot so that nothing leaks into the build.

Well, the main argument I have is that sby (normally) installs into Yosys data directory. But if they're locked together then I don't really care one way or another. Maybe sby can recommend some SAT solvers and that's easier to do as a separate package.

Yeah, that isn't an issue for arch, it might be for other distros.

You can use a docker container.

Please no :/

I wonder if I could change your mind, I thought the same before arch.

Short answer: I'm used to Debian and too old to switch. Long answer: I should probably switch but the amount of effort required to do it is not something I can justify any time soon.

Please no :/

It's natively supported, it is literally a 2 line configuration and the steps work just the same. Github caches the containers so the bring up time is pretty low.

Short answer: I'm used to Debian and too old to switch. Long answer: I should probably switch but the amount of effort required to do it is not something I can justify any time soon.

Eh, I think it should be pretty straight forward, especially for someone like you. You'd essentially just man pacman to learn the package manager commands and that's it. There are no quirks in the distribution itself as you are one choosing how everything is set up. But anyway, I don't want to take more of your time. Feel free to ping me if you want to hear more 😄.

You'd essentially just man pacman to learn the package manager commands and that's it.

Yeah and that's exactly what I don't have time for. I don't really have stability in any other part of my life, let me have it at least in my damn choice of Linux distro.