Received: (at 68811) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Jan 2024 00:38:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 29 19:38:43 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33938 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1rUc9D-0005k3-DV for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:38:43 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-x42b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::42b]:55495) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zaccysc@HIDDEN>) id 1rUc9B-0005jq-Pu for 68811 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:38:42 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6da202aa138so2090551b3a.2 for <68811 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:38:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1706575107; x=1707179907; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6rhZ09Vy5ClxYopx+wtcvpL+eH3erWGLuAw498OGKtE=; b=dHThPv92B0PP6YWpyFHsi6ebpTvqDUJDgptzqyclLVbpsMLDC9O0UctwQMDYxFFJ/n YZ2OHNSv51DRIpWE3onTmd5avW+TBwhDIKvnzvlDdvKnL4SyHAbtVcmIk2tG7R60OX97 DmrXWG+C1XSi64MPGfWAww7RKs45gdJLEv7Ow0Gn/CPKlmKACKXL2fhqOGP7hKEsZmIW byhWkiAb4zZG4kN2ydnfXGclR9LrWnkaZ9LWQ/NaI4jd7odYx1rpM16YrtU8DacIFO9A DH/69ZqKNieYV6CMSgoFrKG3Aqb5ZXVc6icea3CBREzS3I5GuwvW9Yjii6gZ73ZDtJEB xovg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706575107; x=1707179907; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=6rhZ09Vy5ClxYopx+wtcvpL+eH3erWGLuAw498OGKtE=; b=P2PDhyLVz1fzFKo3HVCTLuqFeO4owQxaDeNbgTQ059kocrjCuc8F8F42pvtN3xn41L Nyn5XLe5xSgvD2LbZje4FuiyA/3y8C1PkPNGOj+NE6ELA1J8ZtUVUgDwAYqwT9jR02vp /YrmveUVEPkPp8P67wDebeNFQglDNU+veGOSv6Gqj5yUUZdCUXEEbQfao4luMm9Qp0AR chc2Gm3F/47/9ZG8eL3UdiDcIdecYOmsxZSzKxLzXnOjTYk0Pwg75MrlLJ1L3mmgoBtm EolesE8AlCDsjJZ4OkXJgwR1rT99yLMZltv02+usGbhj8xskqj+ZBydA+xzq9ugjytKG Xlig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyCeHc7Cj5wtBe82LkWo7JU7W4LxAgtj915wAKiozZ6I5sdkqnH muaaH319aLrtdTx+BsVVJv0+dxtCLYcPSmOv2cYjF7K8S4gMvb4n2QSo/I9xtFc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEeAebScg1MePHYBusfCWSU+S62Bl87q/6BtyvB/gi+w82mmE4M+6BV1/eX6Hnuroi+wGhhEg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:f06:b0:6de:3521:b3c2 with SMTP id cr6-20020a056a000f0600b006de3521b3c2mr3052013pfb.11.1706575106474; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:38:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from pureos ([192.147.44.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b6-20020a62cf06000000b006dbdb5946d7sm6771767pfg.6.2024.01.29.16.38.25 for <68811 <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:38:25 -0800 (PST) From: Zacchaeus Scheffer <zaccysc@HIDDEN> To: 68811 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: build hash inconsistency References: <87bk938z2u.fsf@HIDDEN> <handler.68811.B.170657319418843.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:38:24 -0800 In-Reply-To: <handler.68811.B.170657319418843.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (GNU bug Tracking System's message of "Tue, 30 Jan 2024 00:07:02 +0000") Message-ID: <877cjr8xkv.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 68811 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 (-) Some more context might be useful: Device A (which successfully built qutebrowser over a couple days) ~ $ guix time-machine --commit=deeb7d1f53d7ddfa977b3eadd760312bbd0a2509 -- build qutebrowser --dry-run /gnu/store/i9ir7a26gv1ii98b4bzgvxp1sx0akind-qutebrowser-2.5.4 Device B (trying to avoid building qutebrowser) ~ $ guix time-machine --commit=deeb7d1f53d7ddfa977b3eadd760312bbd0a2509 -- build qutebrowser --dry-run The following derivations would be built: /gnu/store/6n9aq7l5x26xfgrbvws7gvscbzvq5gqn-qutebrowser-2.5.4.drv /gnu/store/05wj7wf7bdlkm1ar58kpakvp52drrz7p-qtwebengine-5.15.10.drv /gnu/store/7nmv55qqw62jwzrd650vm434s3wpi7i3-python-pyqtwebengine-5.15.9.drv I have noticed in the past that sometimes a package gets built twice with two hashes, so I went back and checked if device A had built the 6n9..5gqn qutebrowser store item reported by B in addition to the i9i..ind one A was reporting. There was no 6n9..5gqn qutebrowser build on device A. I don't believe I have never run guix gc on either device. -Zacchae
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#68811; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Jan 2024 00:06:34 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 29 19:06:33 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33802 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1rUbe5-0004tq-J8 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:06:33 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:33690) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zaccysc@HIDDEN>) id 1rUbe2-0004tY-PH for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:06:31 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <zaccysc@HIDDEN>) id 1rUbdi-0006u8-Or for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:06:11 -0500 Received: from mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2d]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <zaccysc@HIDDEN>) id 1rUbdf-0001xi-N0 for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 19:06:09 -0500 Received: by mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5955a4a9b23so1733994eaf.1 for <bug-guix@HIDDEN>; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:06:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1706573164; x=1707177964; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XSHWwlT4nlJ3BHvJcxy41qKtYugE2ecVVP3wD8Oc/Qo=; b=ZEPFTDy1so/iNy+gKx6tAUntOVvWUFrfFM1bOTOPtesHRQfJGu4+GKhwq+bZ95EG5l akJxWSY3m5mvXu1qKlQiKQpHs8NLmvWnJdEfQN4lgtG1KLUX31JFA3n7bBe6OjbKxW0K T/rIfTPE1ImJSVRa1yJUW3bOvqlN6BtrUwXVRkTvYM2ox9ZlLQisaOxTctu2Nj6E/ups +gNEC9SzChnyVUWrHt4UbTe+cyMtHSK1m7rrVz24/izlLIWiMf3LBERxpxW14hEe/SXc XKataRHaBe8mmULtAbexAG6eLM2URVu7D38Uozu4/fGzDd2KZ0RPzd1ZMWCOZYu30cjU VzJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706573164; x=1707177964; h=mime-version:message-id:date:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XSHWwlT4nlJ3BHvJcxy41qKtYugE2ecVVP3wD8Oc/Qo=; b=LLQRgCwZv2Tu3h1+jvu0c9hze6EXYzW3LPoDxDbiwyMvpSkoYd5Vba6obzdZqUfhj5 kRkJjZDV+DXQsOudLOVVcwZnsCfOh3n7XIngIgWDddf+zL5WLvjAE42qDV3yxxbGn241 Uf44ZamYK3BiJ4zyG2nzpQQcJF5odMUzO5eSjYdXcMIQ/tLIiBb9QtWS7a59MiLrdGw8 4e98z/2V443bdjOFUm2L479Q/28Z5oxO82KOFooli+JzSBnHOXsowZmAayJa/xdRIXW3 oj2sg1HciqijODp1f01LNb5ti+H10kWTl+7C3/4U4Is8WARL+t7A9tlaq5G4ac9gOZZs mpQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwJEYUKHY1+zRDajUWbStjdoD5rALmyyz9XUzm32FAV7Z7PZjtH WV+yE+WUG0R61j9zqBnCwLveGh4RqgY5HnOnVvioMMKFCMR5BwRv/AuUqgiQwq4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGUaRfgp5SWVyka8g2RYUx2JTeLtt6lvWb/L6pdaPTSZ756Up+WMkux1lcMeiMyyt9jO00MqQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6358:6f0e:b0:176:c391:3899 with SMTP id r14-20020a0563586f0e00b00176c3913899mr5718825rwn.11.1706573164278; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:06:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from pureos ([192.147.44.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id lp17-20020a056a003d5100b006ddd182bf1csm6456798pfb.46.2024.01.29.16.06.03 for <bug-guix@HIDDEN> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:06:03 -0800 (PST) From: Zacchaeus Scheffer <zaccysc@HIDDEN> To: bug-guix@HIDDEN Subject: build hash inconsistency Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:06:01 -0800 Message-ID: <87bk938z2u.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2d; envelope-from=zaccysc@HIDDEN; helo=mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) 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: -0.0 (/) Hi all, tl;dr I run the following command on two aarch64-linux machines and get two different hashes for the 'qutebrowser' package: guix time-machine --commit=deeb7d1f53d7ddfa977b3eadd760312bbd0a2509 -- build qutebrowser --dry-run Both machines use only the main guix repository, and guix describe gives the same output (except generation number and date, which is fine). Coming from aarch64, building is incredibly expensive. If the build hash doesn't match, then (I believe) there is no hope that my machine will find the packages on a substitute server. To get around this issue, I built my guix home once, guix copy'd the store items, and manually added a symlink in /var/guix/profiles/per-user/USER/guix-home-N-link to point to the foreign guix home build. I couldn't find this issue elsewhere in the issues, but my "hashes don't match" problem is pretty vague. Is this an expected problem? Is this a novel problem? Am I misunderstanding guix time-machine (which seems like it should produce an identical store item)? -Zacchae
Zacchaeus Scheffer <zaccysc@HIDDEN>:bug-guix@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#68811; Package guix.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.