Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 19:11:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 17 14:11:23 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45687 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1l1DSN-0002PA-G3
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:23 -0500
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]:53165)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1l1DSL-0002Ov-Ct
for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:21 -0500
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43])
by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2245B2EB;
Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:15 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
:content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=tSUB6sGiEkUs9/PsVM3ma7MN
2aA0h0gUtrOGQhMt6Vc=; b=NHC9symZJtgP3Z4AYPBYmUe5Hm7eOVvCHXjfLC8O
si8jOZxsw3eg53uzijg/dXpf1pqjPrh60AYJKT9/RGWN03NWm/Wyktn0pbfzlLcW
iSf+Cubx5MTSV5FMEFWLozcIujconJQB6X6UDSeyB3NogX8uB6SBagdLqcqaUHtn
GpA=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to
:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy
:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=tSUB6s
GiEkUs9/PsVM3ma7MN2aA0h0gUtrOGQhMt6Vc=; b=Y6BuJ3egMGmmEupD2hgN2l
vqWuz76a4S3GmhxeTsGk59zDs6dVGelYWGn84FAtUseN7StvcIJoccSG77UBHNie
qBY/zDWVOCtX68tRlLa27dPj7wRx/nuTiCZoPBuB+6o64QPcXruUVLmoqca0xQAp
pRN34U5jgKrNyo/N6Nrwgwb2VEz9AM1eozt6zLVnJATLySOutiPBzZJByqGKqSm+
MxE9qtejiW02lGsQJxDJ4JR7PakOoPYY8e3r2/U8n6YfANOowF0cZHO+kafBnXva
OUe234cGbayynzXycV0gWH7J6j78tLgjy0ZPgWXXI4ByyU8p4a0jBAKlcYznV3kQ
==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:0YsEYFb3G522CzFlpgb8wRZMwYvybijqYfnZ1YZ9pD6jvwFQU9irxw>
<xme:0YsEYMavXeSYeda-9sRXAg9R_jXieboUWUpPm_hKsOnUgclQN4pQsCmPd6uuJT2bO
k3W5P6mT3FiWGmUEg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrtdeigdduvdegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne
cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfh
rghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtth
gvrhhnpeeukeektdffvddtudegjeegtdevhfeufeeivdejiedtieegtdevjedvjeehffev
gfenucfkphepuddttddruddurdduieelrdduudeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:0YsEYH8TuB0KQsyb1rlTq6MzIzaitGodKya7R8hHkOir-X3l45p3MA>
<xmx:0YsEYDrT22iff8smMhnwZAyjS98BOQ-WNKYpYfLrtQ3od5CtYXHaUg>
<xmx:0YsEYArQGmeCDc6TFl4DiUalBdI4nxvZ8cDTIDK6kQtNpeIJh8isMA>
<xmx:0osEYLUQdI5gAfCxVOn8RsU9eRfjW4LZC9JE4LOla9wv7EFxlL65HA>
Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net
[100.11.169.118])
by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C9F7C240057;
Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:13 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:11:11 -0500
From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Message-ID: <YASLz1/e/r74Oh7g@HIDDEN>
References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai>
<X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai>
<YAM3X0TOTT3VfakZ@HIDDEN> <87mtx7hpwy.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87mtx7hpwy.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>, 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
mail@HIDDEN, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 10:29:49AM +0100, Mathieu Othacehe wrote:
> If we want to disable SBCL builds temporarily we can do something
> similar to what I did to disable Rust builds on non-x86_64 architectures
> here: 0ed631866cc0b7cece2b0a0b50e39b37ae91bb67.
------
diff --git a/gnu/packages/rust.scm b/gnu/packages/rust.scm
index 35a96b5754..91b5d6b6ec 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/rust.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/rust.scm
@@ -452,6 +452,7 @@ test = { path = \"../libtest\" }
(variable "LIBRARY_PATH")
(files '("lib" "lib64")))))
+ (supported-systems '("x86_64-linux"))
(synopsis "Compiler for the Rust programming language")
(description "Rust is a systems programming language that provides memory
safety and thread safety guarantees.")
------
Hm, this would also prevent users from building the packages on their
own machines. We need a way to make changes like this but limit them to
the build farm.
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 11:36:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 17 06:36:02 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44621 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1l16Lh-00040H-RO for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 06:36:02 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:59162) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mail@HIDDEN>) id 1l16Lb-000404-Tz for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 06:35:59 -0500 Received: from localhost (188.29.101.63.threembb.co.uk [188.29.101.63]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92F4B27BC13; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:35:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id ab6e6e9f; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:35:52 +0000 (UTC) References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai> <YAM3X0TOTT3VfakZ@HIDDEN> <87mtx7hpwy.fsf@HIDDEN> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1 From: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64 In-reply-to: <87mtx7hpwy.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:35:49 +0000 Message-ID: <87mtx794oa.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826 Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN> writes: > Hello Leo & Guillaume, > >> That's a good observation. I hadn't thought of it. >> >> I'm CC-ing Mathieu Othacehe and guix-sysadmin so that we can disable >> these builds until we can fix the bug for real. Mathieu: this might >> explain why the build farm is spending all its effort on aarch64. > > If we want to disable SBCL builds temporarily we can do something > similar to what I did to disable Rust builds on non-x86_64 architectures > here: 0ed631866cc0b7cece2b0a0b50e39b37ae91bb67. > > Regarding the rebuilding that is a limitation of the new Cuirass remote > building mechanism I am aware of and I need to solve. As build failures > are only cached of the machine performing the build and the builds are > now distributed to all the machines across the build farm, we need to > find a way to centralize the builds failure cache. > > It would also be nice to optionally publish the build failures cache so > that the user doesn't try to build a package that is known to be failing > on the build farm. Chris, have you encountered this issue with the Build > Coordinator? Not really. The first thing to note is that I'm running the Guix Build Coordinator currently without the guix-daemon --cache-failures option, in fact it's probably unwise to do so, as it would mean that rather than some builds taking place, the guix-daemon could just return a cached failure. I should probably mention this in the README. The way this situation is dealt with in the Guix Build Coordinator is simplified by the agents not attempting builds where the derivation inputs aren't present. If an agent is unable to ensure all the inputs are present, it just reports this to the coordinator. The behaviour is configurable, but the default missing inputs hook will submit a new build for a missing input, but only if one doesn't already exist. Because of this, you don't get the behaviour where some missing prerequisite that fails to built is built over and over again, every time you try and build a derivation that uses it. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmAEIRVfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9XfF9BAAs7g5bizndbOWK0euRKaN9i0G8Z4FMF63 uegYSNy2/opaqSmlIlH6rW/FTvWR258rjuPoVLiN+OWygkfRlJHzClVpu2mi5pHD 3wXA5AI3Dk8eMqTpgkaN7cZsqqlTooi5YP0JY/wTb9Gs86tzOYIrxikhYyqr5r+B m2kW1uq2elXjvbAU/OC8otS4opBypz9bUgZa4R3/cgPHvC/kwQuF/e/8kutsrN3e yaNwDvvrXBkxK/umR2RGCFGYIeCMCKigYdTE7JX6d/zdbOWQ/5AoxVCJe46djqOo 61HNNgWVw698k2bqnmpWNFVgOsamjzbpfZgPYw+MDt8EiTLbT2cRST//tFjUEvnd Wj8/bcWD9HTFKSi//h+37R5izXClXsM0K2fLR0KW64aT5ai0LxeJlS85gs0TSaD7 rO+rBpHU2y/yBDigCObi4GjBoxSTih/BeWd5LPU6Rv5RBqcwILxyZS60EcUxknPS Ij0zR/grLM6p+b/1M39Lvq8/+Ad87a2Rppj2K1odaqpvXzu5kv/ZWHCkKVvg3gfE Ptfqi0aW5BBLF66RjaKjrDahGg6fFQDYGHkjqT1a18x+DSefPzhRjXTWtBywpRMQ 8ZCX4zkTTxSCHnxinUx/1Fc6Hy7EH5idwEN7e8UKbBvy7hVjHw5aZYtbmcNxZRFc l5gZ4Cui1qo= =ZWAI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 09:30:00 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 17 04:30:00 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44554 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1l14Nj-0000t4-Pi for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 04:30:00 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58516) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <othacehe@HIDDEN>) id 1l14Nh-0000sr-TC for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 04:29:59 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35134) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <othacehe@HIDDEN>) id 1l14Nc-0002aE-Cy; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 04:29:52 -0500 Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:1538:87ab:3a95:7600] (port=43980 helo=cervin) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <othacehe@HIDDEN>) id 1l14Nb-0007eu-R8; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 04:29:52 -0500 From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN> To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64 References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai> <YAM3X0TOTT3VfakZ@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:29:49 +0100 In-Reply-To: <YAM3X0TOTT3VfakZ@HIDDEN> (Leo Famulari's message of "Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:39 -0500") Message-ID: <87mtx7hpwy.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826 Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>, 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, mail@HIDDEN, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello Leo & Guillaume, > That's a good observation. I hadn't thought of it. > > I'm CC-ing Mathieu Othacehe and guix-sysadmin so that we can disable > these builds until we can fix the bug for real. Mathieu: this might > explain why the build farm is spending all its effort on aarch64. If we want to disable SBCL builds temporarily we can do something similar to what I did to disable Rust builds on non-x86_64 architectures here: 0ed631866cc0b7cece2b0a0b50e39b37ae91bb67. Regarding the rebuilding that is a limitation of the new Cuirass remote building mechanism I am aware of and I need to solve. As build failures are only cached of the machine performing the build and the builds are now distributed to all the machines across the build farm, we need to find a way to centralize the builds failure cache. It would also be nice to optionally publish the build failures cache so that the user doesn't try to build a package that is known to be failing on the build farm. Chris, have you encountered this issue with the Build Coordinator? Thanks, Mathieu
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2021 18:58:51 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 16 13:58:51 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44063 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1l0qmg-00036D-Oc for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:50 -0500 Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]:38407) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1l0qme-00035y-E7 for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:48 -0500 Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4241653; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=hcu3ghh6k3CMWVhvAX9Hs3By VntxYnsuCYFKkuWwsvo=; b=Y+zBgvx1hWSpeZyV8nltLEbAfacK7NqPLpCEPLQ3 efalUWMCnNHDtLMk0/EuIdcVps8RtdTL7plfq1SGykYOrO9iTPcf+m+nZ6FSNVAU ZArpb1pELIpDoMGlOq7/JvjaxRtAgWVL/HZ6cCVJsFo9yUlyttgHDZFoWfPNGldo 0co= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=hcu3gh h6k3CMWVhvAX9Hs3ByVntxYnsuCYFKkuWwsvo=; b=Eo5aTN6gvYQ1IcyWME2q8E pHXGeHry8bVeU6ksHSwcn/HmwTOQDH5Je879OV5d5JHvh+hJ9Ko/HcEaiwjEW9Pa AfWA/stMsUh7NzUBuYxceCgv+lFM551imaAaz26fF5OIorf8xkcz1zEo5wgdq/nw +sxxKBN7oEBf3vOiL1sS7LvhLRwN4ZRVBdMHoagdHT4kN6vFH0D0ce8CZW0J8mhm 4nrIMllKrXZP4kbdr0R67BSZ5Q6CQw4mykHh2ez2jcHU8xM8T/NDivDjFULaiQSe lTnbIQdbhDTWVdgFNWn0IJCVcyJ84kj0gYf1oL7MRFef6p/ZYkXRIctU6vu8XJ8Q == X-ME-Sender: <xms:YTcDYB20QeldD-F74IfbM5NOgsIs7KBNCRLZxN1iJvO7Zy8MauriQA> <xme:YTcDYIHafdF07pTB-GJSb7f_bqMDvi6M1WwQGlHWE6aQbm4e6bAJJ08jUVmHxooQ3 NBebRrFSIG8MdZ0ag> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrtdeggdduvdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfh rghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpedvveegkeduiedvieeludevkeeugfeuueelhedtffegffdtfeekveelffeufedu keenucffohhmrghinhepghhnuhdrohhrghenucfkphepuddttddruddurdduieelrdduud eknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgv ohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:YTcDYB5HMol1cXjEKEagF-ybIgjhDHNXRl0Q19ABvwJJGY_CHFimkQ> <xmx:YTcDYO2n2G6WRvV83tawVE_AVUhIXDpOIevKTXKTakArz_SOd1UQ7w> <xmx:YTcDYEEy3mnYK4KDjZ1GxkRUobNtJwg-4Nspsti3sFsktQINxyG9Ig> <xmx:YTcDYJTmCgaVmQujQy6Xd5njnhOgbAXNYrVbS02j51GRSkE4Db0JKQ> Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [100.11.169.118]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 505531080057; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:58:39 -0500 From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64 Message-ID: <YAM3X0TOTT3VfakZ@HIDDEN> References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="E5hvDICIZM5BvgE4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826 Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) --E5hvDICIZM5BvgE4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote: > When taking a look at the logs of failing builds of sbcl-* packages on > aarch64-linux (for example at [1] for master or at [2] for staging), > I saw that the build jobs try to build sbcl (which is currently failing) > for every package. >=20 > I would have expected the builds for sbcl-* packages to be marked as > "failed because missing dependency" given that the main dependency of > the asdf-build-system/sbcl failed to build. Instead the build farm is > trying to rebuild sbcl over and over, which wastes quite some time and > resources. >=20 > It looks like the dependencies of the build system are not considered as > dependencies for the packages that use this build system. > Am I missing something? That's a good observation. I hadn't thought of it. I'm CC-ing Mathieu Othacehe and guix-sysadmin so that we can disable these builds until we can fix the bug for real. Mathieu: this might explain why the build farm is spending all its effort on aarch64. By the way, SBCL can be built for aarch64 according to Efraim: http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-01-13.log#105652 So, the original point of this bug is obviated, and I'm re-titling it to address your observation, Guillaume. --E5hvDICIZM5BvgE4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAmADN1wACgkQJkb6MLrK fwiBdhAA1HZOR3ryrc87Ahm5CIcrA+K09GZan7qAppEFCt+pKEyXpXMmpR8nblKb W8+mpcQBh3cT6bjIYesiBxH5YSm7MPSJeKMr/i9vX738lIoBrJUl2TcaI8qLAJ0r 2sgFaSw5pNnt62AAQ1rljlBF4+ZeHyIEQaq5euwkM4x5MNEXcCT/Y2J5wyB9TL9L jmDY1cKoHZOi4WZclUkvRzv3Pjy68/0LlEglUWr4OaYjvltzwSYRAFezevn0VqFE ocTfuXxAmtFqpFbEdm/5HSgiTVWK1t810svY/LGXfkdc0DGX030VoUpONdIcg57S ZE+G0CXZVnnLLZI0KbqIPXtO1lMaEVI8cNFlj6SWdwnNYm/Gk4KHTR3jFdj8GHF8 SLARCxsqQJMsjMk1+8ItfXpKjmOPVOATzkXPH9Rb459FGItOLAHoOPAfwVSdWAdk YNgNTSZpzRFYmBij4uTjkKzKlHycy/41FK1/CRw+yAroN1LMP/Xxn3fe5FA/ji7O ixbpwfqmTh9+NKyL8AVOtOfZxJVrQmEtJsH2kaHXX2F2dE9pE8WQG2ZDWYz9WQAt Xh8y9ZKBpvpEUSlDSHe/YuZ896ZmGlxFbWWD7wf5ltW8hEHzkHt23INkrowZP1cJ Xt/PEUNdcLaxggeo5WT3cVp1d2JXR2/yH2cutILkCYK4FWplYiA= =Hgrh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --E5hvDICIZM5BvgE4--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2021 09:43:10 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 16 04:43:10 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42420 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1l0i6v-0003f6-U3 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 04:43:10 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:41601) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <glv@HIDDEN>) id 1l0i6t-0003eX-2a for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 04:43:08 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4BA116005C for <45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 10:43:00 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1610790180; bh=LoHYc601hBg+FFSJ1N7iu0VZIxYVfcfzY8iN+hJjVuw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=hDt25bUCGm1q07KrOxEQT4InUd3OXDIFUKYmEFBtHLUJiJVfC3OylK+vDHgx2wpEv jF1BeO2+PBkbZdqzhhlcny31FOjFJoP9FNSupGP/7fC03v095CfaiU+rnIBJW5YkbA FE/sKsvY/ROc4tnXYF6vDm7/0O6jBmr7FB1pVyz3AFKVdJ9evDS/sM2aLneOXrbdfW mGSyrcB1OY+wzubQcmjjsQ/R91uYcuFHbFxKlblTkyv1fNB4FAxGNscUxVYfFdm5gG UteszQk1wMrJKuhQNuSAXWjUIUjZhWGT9z2CxuvLHV21LYVlsEociMox4116vZ0l1b jUcYigE+6Is5g== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4DHtQC595Vz6tm5; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 10:42:59 +0100 (CET) References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1 From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN> To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64 In-reply-to: <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 10:42:58 +0100 Message-ID: <877dod1al9.fsf@yamatai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826 Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> skribis: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:03:47PM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote: >> I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using >> "guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't >> have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault. > > Thanks! On #guix, Efraim reported that the builds were succeeding on his > aarch64 hardware. So, I'm not sure what's going on :/ When taking a look at the logs of failing builds of sbcl-* packages on aarch64-linux (for example at [1] for master or at [2] for staging), I saw that the build jobs try to build sbcl (which is currently failing) for every package. I would have expected the builds for sbcl-* packages to be marked as "failed because missing dependency" given that the main dependency of the asdf-build-system/sbcl failed to build. Instead the build farm is trying to rebuild sbcl over and over, which wastes quite some time and resources. It looks like the dependencies of the build system are not considered as dependencies for the packages that use this build system. Am I missing something? [1] https://ci.guix.gnu.org/eval/31355?status=failed [2] https://ci.guix.gnu.org/eval/20644?status=failed --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIUEAREKAC0WIQTLxZxm7Ce5cXlAaz5r6CCK3yH+PwUCYAK1Ig8cZ2x2QHBvc3Rl by5uZXQACgkQa+ggit8h/j9h4AD+MBEdQORhMvPrvaJZVVljTjiw19ooig9SRpJU R71vvvYA/2fPqVnhZtiGpghQZzNCEYlON93rUj4f4rKtlexnjt+g =9u/D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Jan 2021 23:25:19 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 13 18:25:19 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36789 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1kzpVv-0004WK-Jn for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:19 -0500 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:54713) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1kzpVt-0004Vy-NP for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:18 -0500 Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E915C017C; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:12 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=TqwQXCHlXWGuZmSU04NDXrK7 cDf6Dk9HPhP0f+89mxQ=; b=c7mU3d8s0BS7Lbn5hZ+7qef4Ap0Rao+rw81OLesy qVc7ZHrMgE56+ARclSu7T3vbyhdOVcO3KGn5ikILJQIy6hyQSztE5KXRGz1MemIE eWb/9eIxBGs8mHMmnF/Xfwigi28g4i0OTNyMZz9DatxPfFbwUGVubgqjlaIH4zNI a80= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=TqwQXC HlXWGuZmSU04NDXrK7cDf6Dk9HPhP0f+89mxQ=; b=OtDHIGUxAhN3nqMAHPQm7K zWtzqTHvFqudHYG3xjkuE6+XthVXtSJ8EaUaKjHaDha0nbnYHamwLr4k2kR/qnL6 0pdc1b9qxaWylnfwrwhcFaCtea+Tg5ymsKERuBG8judV3SGBkpqg/jvaLS4LQlRP C5iwvDogkW6sM36eQAb5joDBZK6exG7m8h+pU/OsxeKxBGD8P0ymFuTkSkm4hovP +4QlI7nithRYKIvVXzpgb83UV8TW5+N0Zsm1o4n949DJi6+7Qetuow2HV/O6fPl4 H3NhZ43XyYUdWmuvlWvIppJnrHjkmSGhB3FvJYbvShHH6iLF1uUG66/F/BLs8gQg == X-ME-Sender: <xms:V4H_X01rtI9m9X6ypTgLLedDbT8vDw9st_2gSecxUi6E2q5TJL-g5w> <xme:V4H_X_H5KkH3CavdMnPviZAml8c606UZWhhJcb70GTEJLilGS2dvJleak2_WDIxU- w5bUl3Ph74CEAw6BA> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedukedrtdeggddtlecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertd dttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfhrghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghr ihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeukeektdffvddtudegjeegtdevhfeufe eivdejiedtieegtdevjedvjeehffevgfenucfkphepuddttddruddurdduieelrdduudek necuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgvoh esfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:V4H_X85JZ7taYXwcbuIiPITKfDOCGgvq33lbVqNMoVA5RiaQ7egjgQ> <xmx:V4H_X93sFIqrwXxNwHacxIgPi0Ekkb0Om2XTTm8DzX_7A1BFLZ-Myg> <xmx:V4H_X3Est9VOmjfARqId9PPbk3AdgXqDueZs56I9kTJkxnGekhrBuQ> <xmx:WIH_X-wZYFbswg9gd02JyXHajH0TO7EaLPGkGh5YHny43LTozdsLdg> Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [100.11.169.118]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D0325108005B; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:09 -0500 From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64 Message-ID: <X/+BVdUmj97xsEW4@HIDDEN> References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN> <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826 Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:03:47PM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote: > I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using > "guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't > have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault. Thanks! On #guix, Efraim reported that the builds were succeeding on his aarch64 hardware. So, I'm not sure what's going on :/
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Jan 2021 21:04:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 13 16:04:17 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36670 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1kznJM-0005C4-SQ
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:04:17 -0500
Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:40393)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <glv@HIDDEN>) id 1kznJK-0005Bk-3Z
for 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:04:11 -0500
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130])
by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C589B2400FD
for <45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 22:04:03 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017;
t=1610571843; bh=wuXNr4rWKkwhxZN8uU54LwtM1LhRm3DgyjJ839h4Z9Q=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From;
b=jSkLYKFBeWhGKMPcGL9by5qTqnBXktWxTFgTQjNWaPwJnD/T+kajpSZUNV/H1RbF4
0PGZIBzprwdnwlLRshXScu/2es/hILAImQac71+l2b90s8fNHyuimilQ88kImUAcFN
YXVky5LcQjU2gaUUC8BPKPsPpuK8qQYXdTlb9uLi9JgNcszArvmX8XZJbWiqHOuA84
0EhJYwSfAlgUr5yPkuEShuDO1PONE0qJjah9agfIyw1YEcBzHrDj4J3tmneIydr4WY
KR0ljau3OyuuiDHEAMGc/CeWekat6HRJ8lHSl1Il6UTrTlnl1/HNW0MkCwbopJfLil
FrQU1SZxsWFNQ==
Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4DGKgQ5k4jz9rxQ;
Wed, 13 Jan 2021 22:04:02 +0100 (CET)
References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN>
User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1
From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
In-reply-to: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 22:03:47 +0100
Message-ID: <87eeioczws.fsf@yamatai>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 45826
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> skribis:
> I noticed that many Common Lisp or SBCL-related packages are failing to
> build on the aarc64 platform on our build farm, due the failure to build
> SBCL:
>
> From the log of <https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/180326/details>:
>
> ------
> //entering make-target-2.sh
> //doing warm init - compilation phase
> This is SBCL 2.1.0, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
> More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>.
>
> SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
> It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
> BSD-style licenses. See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
> distribution for more information.
> Initial page table:
> Gen Boxed Code Raw LgBox LgCode LgRaw Pin Alloc Waste =
Trig WP GCs Mem-age
> 6 397 250 0 0 0 0 0 42335440 66352 =
2000000 647 0 0.0000
> Total bytes allocated =3D 42335440
> Dynamic-space-size bytes =3D 3221225472
> COLD-INIT... (Length(TLFs)=3D 9736)
> Disassembler: 72 printers, 0 prefilters, 4 labelers
> CORRUPTION WARNING in SBCL pid 1774 tid 1774:
> Memory fault at 0xfffffffffffffffa (pc=3D0x1002199f70)
> The integrity of this image is possibly compromised.
> Exiting.
> Error opening /dev/tty: No such device or address
> Welcome to LDB, a low-level debugger for the Lisp runtime environment.
> ldb>=20
> real 0m6.120s
> user 0m5.958s
> sys 0m0.137s
> command "sh" "make.sh" "clisp" "--prefix=3D/gnu/store/j1ciw4dc8iskd5fdcw0=
s1ba08kkg7vx6-sbcl-2.1.0" "--dynamic-space-size=3D3072" "--with-sb-core-com=
pression" "--with-sb-xref-for-internals" failed with status 1
> ------
>
> It appears that SBCL can support this platform. However, until we make
> it work, I plan to remove aarch64 from the "supported-systems" of sbcl,
> to avoid attempting these builds.
I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using
"guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't
have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIUEAREKAC0WIQTLxZxm7Ce5cXlAaz5r6CCK3yH+PwUCX/9gNA8cZ2x2QHBvc3Rl
by5uZXQACgkQa+ggit8h/j92kwEAnEnm+2JgYtk3E4vAtgbxUH/LiK37rjPaCmDf
fAs4lEgA+gKSYpQahe2Ih/t2mVKH3UX1TasYXhmdhl4aBbNSqIuH
=JK4S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jan 2021 21:04:33 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 12 16:04:33 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33449 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1kzQq3-0003H7-7O
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:33 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:57364)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1kzQpy-0003Gw-Nd
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:26 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36196)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1kzQpy-0007CR-Ce
for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:22 -0500
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:54665)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1kzQpt-00007M-Vo
for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:22 -0500
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43])
by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32DFF5C05D1;
Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163])
by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:15 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name;
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=
mesmtp; bh=QccCwgU7ZaUceXJ+wJW6PqfY9i85szBKNI3DduKaZf8=; b=otLln
hzLLJVRmnaELcUig5oNXYTpjaOdqEtPAFCKnKoHI3V7dHQiibIBpUvqe+phAJgYi
wEpI8PlfesXmZa1cp+izSdUuPcoqSoBwweY6yE/5zVFG0FT8STOCnbkpABQ2D2sr
mFv2+bj0v5/9p+qXS26xnpvZrcnxxWyDG5cYvg=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id
:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender
:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=QccCwgU7ZaUceXJ+wJW6PqfY9i85s
zBKNI3DduKaZf8=; b=H3YurzGZkaeWtAWa/qFs85QY4Qs5V9MRzmYqe64bRn5VW
/ifzqpb2BmPj5EW1+eGZ+erIaKam8d1X4fwS7VU/SNJSlJmqSRpKhrXYRAYa+az9
bU+06pTJu0hEWtDY58xRUkgh1OL79008M9OugctHqX4k5XvbNKRIt+liv3/HW9vw
oXeiF2qy1IfsfOLC0grTy58zA9LRX6/ZUk5arPZn98nxl2MURlDrX7JNbda451gb
pOi0EICFQGjx2xAabVa0ULstOXwV/6URj7DAZzpowhuAhLTvLx6BxeTHJ55mLxlt
XLxGvzvEFtZRo02pQ/cwBE5woIxu0FyZGmOsR3QAw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:zw7-XymfcyHJ5IU96B6wSZt79tMN16OXlocyC-lJZrm3whzuByiB2w>
<xme:zw7-X522-66BLOJA9vXncUDdRAlD4FtCMyoM9wC7GNRz1bRPnOSZRns0ErQwsxGUO
-KpraUvtUPNF-aqow>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedukedrtddtgdduudefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkgggtugesthdtredttd
dtvdenucfhrhhomhepnfgvohcuhfgrmhhulhgrrhhiuceolhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhi
rdhnrghmvgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepvefgkeevfeffhfefvdeigeehleegfeetle
dtkedtgfevgfduudegjeefffevfeeunecuffhomhgrihhnpehgnhhurdhorhhgpdhmrghk
vgdqthgrrhhgvghtqddvrdhshhdpshgstghlrdhorhhgnecukfhppedutddtrdduuddrud
eiledruddukeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhr
ohhmpehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgv
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:zw7-XwonWh2GwbgP27QW_rxybzuGRO8nicQG5An4qHJ_qjSrM_V2Zg>
<xmx:zw7-X2kHkWwREaPYmoaHDi0K4sHUN01by9TFjJTFE9D4y5FYfGM0HA>
<xmx:zw7-Xw1CeKVJFPNuJzBKu_yVHHimRFt68HiWWosASw2a6M5X4bGn9g>
<xmx:zw7-XxBm_yOVFyZL5kdOjkryNyn8jwit-nWG9-l5H2agJgLb4LtsxQ>
Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net
[100.11.169.118])
by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F1FBA108005C
for <bug-guix@HIDDEN>; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:12 -0500
From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
To: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Subject: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Message-ID: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.26; envelope-from=leo@HIDDEN;
helo=out2-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-Spam_score_int: -27
X-Spam_score: -2.8
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
I noticed that many Common Lisp or SBCL-related packages are failing to
build on the aarc64 platform on our build farm, due the failure to build
SBCL:
From the log of <https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/180326/details>:
------
//entering make-target-2.sh
//doing warm init - compilation phase
This is SBCL 2.1.0, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>.
SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
BSD-style licenses. See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
distribution for more information.
Initial page table:
Gen Boxed Code Raw LgBox LgCode LgRaw Pin Alloc Waste Trig WP GCs Mem-age
6 397 250 0 0 0 0 0 42335440 66352 2000000 647 0 0.0000
Total bytes allocated = 42335440
Dynamic-space-size bytes = 3221225472
COLD-INIT... (Length(TLFs)= 9736)
Disassembler: 72 printers, 0 prefilters, 4 labelers
CORRUPTION WARNING in SBCL pid 1774 tid 1774:
Memory fault at 0xfffffffffffffffa (pc=0x1002199f70)
The integrity of this image is possibly compromised.
Exiting.
Error opening /dev/tty: No such device or address
Welcome to LDB, a low-level debugger for the Lisp runtime environment.
ldb>
real 0m6.120s
user 0m5.958s
sys 0m0.137s
command "sh" "make.sh" "clisp" "--prefix=/gnu/store/j1ciw4dc8iskd5fdcw0s1ba08kkg7vx6-sbcl-2.1.0" "--dynamic-space-size=3072" "--with-sb-core-compression" "--with-sb-xref-for-internals" failed with status 1
------
It appears that SBCL can support this platform. However, until we make
it work, I plan to remove aarch64 from the "supported-systems" of sbcl,
to avoid attempting these builds.
Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>:bug-guix@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#45826; Package guix.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.