Consider setting CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_{ARMV7L, RISCV64, S390X, ...} to n (for Homebrew)

[AkihiroSuda]

armv7l, riscv64, and s390x (being added via #3319) are very rarely used and should not waste the disk space by default:

$ ls -lh ~/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-*
-rw-r--r--  1 suda  staff    53M  3  9 05:04 /Users/suda/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-aarch64
-rw-r--r--  1 suda  staff    52M  3  9 05:04 /Users/suda/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-armv7l
-rw-r--r--  1 suda  staff    53M  3  9 05:04 /Users/suda/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-riscv64
-rw-r--r--  1 suda  staff    58M  3  9 05:04 /Users/suda/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-s390x
-rw-r--r--  1 suda  staff    55M  3  9 05:04 /Users/suda/.local/share/lima/lima-guestagent.Linux-x86_64

My suggestion is:

Dist	Config
Source distribution	Just compile aarch64 and x86_64 by default. Probably, there should be a script like ./configure --guestagent-arch=all to allow keeping compiling everything.
Homebrew	Split the lima formula to lima and lima-extra-guestagents. Needs to be negotiated with Homebrew maintainers.
Binary distribution in https://github.com/lima-vm/lima/releases	Should follow the same convention as Homebrew?

The same should apply to other potential guestagents in future too (ppc64le, FreeBSD-x86_64, etc.)

[afbjorklund]

Probably, there should be a script like ./configure --guestagent-arch=all to allow keeping compiling everything.

Normally (with konfig) this is handled by providing different config files.

You can even keep the defaults as they are, and only change config.mk

config.mk

CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_X8664=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_AARCH64=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_ARMV7L=n
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_RISCV64=n
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_S390X=n

---

defconfig (kconfig-conf --savedefconfig defconfig Kconfig)

# CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_ARMV7L is not set
# CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_RISCV64 is not set
# CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_S390X is not set

alldefconfig (kconfig-conf --alldefconfig Kconfig)

CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_X8664=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_AARCH64=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_ARMV7L=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_RISCV64=y
CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_S390X=y

[jandubois]

I'm confused; can't we already build whatever we want with a combination of these:

lima/Makefile

Lines 97 to 101 in 4a88b71

	@echo 'Targets for files in _output/share/lima/:'
	@echo '- guestagents : Build guestagents for archs enabled by CONFIG_GUESTAGENT_ARCH_*'
	@echo '- native-guestagent : Build guestagent for native arch'
	@echo '- additional-guestagents : Build guestagents for archs other than native arch'
	@echo '- <arch>-guestagent : Build guestagent for <arch>: $(sort $(LINUX_GUESTAGENT_ARCHS))'

Personally I always thought that the kconfig mechanism is kind of weird.

[afbjorklund]

Personally I always thought that the kconfig mechanism is kind of weird.

I think at this point, the makefile targets could probably replace the Kconfig?

It's a bit doubled up, and having dedicated targets seemed to be preferred.

I mostly used it (as an alternative to autoconf), because I was familar with it...

[AkihiroSuda]

I think at this point, the makefile targets could probably replace the Kconfig?

👍

[AkihiroSuda]

@lima-vm/maintainers

Are we safe to do this in v1.1, or do we want to revisit this in v1.2?

Dist	Config
Source distribution	Just compile aarch64 and x86_64 by default. Probably, there should be a script like ./configure --guestagent-arch=all to allow keeping compiling everything.
Homebrew	Split the lima formula to lima and lima-extra-guestagents. Needs to be negotiated with Homebrew maintainers.
Binary distribution in https://github.com/lima-vm/lima/releases	Should follow the same convention as Homebrew?

[jandubois]

I don't like the idea of an additional configure script. I think we should just add an all-guestagents target, and redefine guestagents to mean aarch64 and x86_64 unconditionally.

For Homebrew it makes sense to me to just include aarch64 and x86_64 guestagents. I don't think the additional guestagents need to be packaged, but it is up to the Homebrew maintainers.

For the binary distribution I don't mind including all guestagents. I don't know who is using the binary releases, but the download numbers are small compared to Homebrew installs:

$ gh api repos/lima-vm/lima/releases --jq '
  [ ["Tag", "Asset", "Downloads"] ] +
  (map( .tag_name as $tag | .assets | map([ $tag, .name, .download_count ]) ) | add)
  | .[] | @tsv' | grep -vE '(alpha|beta|go-mod|SHA)' | column -s $'\t' -t
Tag      Asset                             Downloads
v1.0.7   lima-1.0.7-Darwin-arm64.tar.gz    1052
v1.0.7   lima-1.0.7-Darwin-x86_64.tar.gz   1547
v1.0.7   lima-1.0.7-Linux-aarch64.tar.gz   35
v1.0.7   lima-1.0.7-Linux-x86_64.tar.gz    5172
v1.0.6   lima-1.0.6-Darwin-arm64.tar.gz    1287
v1.0.6   lima-1.0.6-Darwin-x86_64.tar.gz   2225
v1.0.6   lima-1.0.6-Linux-aarch64.tar.gz   84
v1.0.6   lima-1.0.6-Linux-x86_64.tar.gz    6059
…

❯ brew info lima
==> lima: stable 1.0.7 (bottled), HEAD
…
==> Analytics
install: 14,704 (30 days), 51,154 (90 days), 192,827 (365 days)
install-on-request: 7,899 (30 days), 28,141 (90 days), 122,289 (365 days)

I just checked brew info lima on Intel, and the Analytics are the same, so these look like combined platform numbers.