GNU bug report logs -
#34934
deeptools is not reproducible
Previous Next
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 34934 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 34934 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 21 Mar 2019 03:09:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
.
(Thu, 21 Mar 2019 03:09:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On current master (commit af184b68e78aa51b6ff50b7327dfbbdb1d6e6843),
deeptools does not build reproducibly:
$ guix build --check --no-grafts deeptools
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
...
guix build: error: derivation `/gnu/store/hky07zjsvai0x3n99lqmgyh6rhld6v4s-deeptools-3.1.3.drv' may not be deterministic: output `/gnu/store/0j8200f20mp5grjkjh5kw2q9a67gw3rn-deeptools-3.1.3' differs
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
$ diff -ru "$(guix build deeptools)" /gnu/store/0j8200f20mp5grjkjh5kw2q9a67gw3rn-deeptools-3.1.3
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
│ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
│ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --dynamic {}
│ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
│ │ │ │ │ │ Dynamic section at offset 0xcd90 contains 30 entries:
│ │ │ │ │ │ Tag Type Name/Value
│ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so.1]
│ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpython3.7m.so.1.0]
│ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
│ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
│ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
│ │ │ │ │ │ - 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath: [/gnu/store/9z98cvjm7p7z21xdid1ryydxy5vyz6wr-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
│ │ │ │ │ │ + 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
[/gnu/store/b7fqhszxl02g6pfm3vw6b3cjz472qrly-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
There are multiple more instances of differences in the two versions.
Maybe something to do with two flavors of Python being used?
$ guix refresh --list-transitive deeptools | tr ' ' '\n' | grep -E 'python-(minimal|wrapper)|python2?@'
python <at> 3.7.0
python <at> 3.7.0
python-wrapper <at> 3.7.0
python-minimal <at> 3.7.0
python-minimal-wrapper <at> 3.7.0
python2 <at> 2.7.15
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Sat, 23 Mar 2019 17:01:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
> │ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
> │ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --dynamic {}
> │ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
> │ │ │ │ │ │ Dynamic section at offset 0xcd90 contains 30 entries:
> │ │ │ │ │ │ Tag Type Name/Value
> │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so.1]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpython3.7m.so.1.0]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ - 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath: [/gnu/store/9z98cvjm7p7z21xdid1ryydxy5vyz6wr-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
> │ │ │ │ │ │ + 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
> [/gnu/store/b7fqhszxl02g6pfm3vw6b3cjz472qrly-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
Hmmm, what’s the difference between these two RUNPATHs?
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Sun, 24 Mar 2019 10:12:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello Ludo,
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2019. márc. 23., Szo, 18:01):
>
> Hi,
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
> > │ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
> > │ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --dynamic {}
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Dynamic section at offset 0xcd90 contains 30 entries:
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Tag Type Name/Value
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so.1]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpython3.7m.so.1.0]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ - 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath: [/gnu/store/9z98cvjm7p7z21xdid1ryydxy5vyz6wr-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
> > │ │ │ │ │ │ + 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
> > [/gnu/store/b7fqhszxl02g6pfm3vw6b3cjz472qrly-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
>
> Hmmm, what’s the difference between these two RUNPATHs?
>
At first They looked ver similar to me, but the hash of the first
python-3.7.0 differs, right at the beginning. I could not dive deeper,
but maybe this can help you out.
> Ludo’.
>
>
>
Best regards,
g_bor
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:23:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Gábor,
Gábor Boskovits <boskovits <at> gmail.com> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2019. márc. 23., Szo, 18:01):
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>>
>> > │ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
>> > │ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --dynamic {}
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Dynamic section at offset 0xcd90 contains 30 entries:
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Tag Type Name/Value
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so.1]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpython3.7m.so.1.0]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ - 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath: [/gnu/store/9z98cvjm7p7z21xdid1ryydxy5vyz6wr-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ + 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
>> > [/gnu/store/b7fqhszxl02g6pfm3vw6b3cjz472qrly-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
>>
>> Hmmm, what’s the difference between these two RUNPATHs?
>>
>
> At first They looked ver similar to me, but the hash of the first
> python-3.7.0 differs, right at the beginning.
Oooh, indeed, I had overlooked that.
So to me that means we’re probably looking at the wrong diff: the hash
is definitely deterministic. Maxim, are you sure you were comparing
/gnu/store/…-deeptools with /gnu/store/…-deeptools-check, as discussed
in another message?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 28 Mar 2019 13:46:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello Ludovic!
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
> Hi Gábor,
>
> Gábor Boskovits <boskovits <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2019. márc. 23., Szo, 18:01):
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>>>
>>> > │ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --dynamic {}
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Dynamic section at offset 0xcd90 contains 30 entries:
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ Tag Type Name/Value
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libz.so.1]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpython3.7m.so.1.0]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ - 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
>>> > [/gnu/store/9z98cvjm7p7z21xdid1ryydxy5vyz6wr-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
>>> > │ │ │ │ │ │ + 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH) Library runpath:
>>> > [/gnu/store/b7fqhszxl02g6pfm3vw6b3cjz472qrly-python-3.7.0/lib:/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/nq4lsyipmfb0q7g26ra45rwwqrh3x8zw-zlib-1.2.11/lib:/gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/5.5.0/../../..]
>>>
>>> Hmmm, what’s the difference between these two RUNPATHs?
>>>
>>
>> At first They looked ver similar to me, but the hash of the first
>> python-3.7.0 differs, right at the beginning.
>
> Oooh, indeed, I had overlooked that.
>
> So to me that means we’re probably looking at the wrong diff: the hash
> is definitely deterministic. Maxim, are you sure you were comparing
> /gnu/store/…-deeptools with /gnu/store/…-deeptools-check, as discussed
> in another message?
That must be my mistake yes; the output of 'guix build --check --no-grafts
python-deeptools':
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
guix build: error: derivation `/gnu/store/hky07zjsvai0x3n99lqmgyh6rhld6v4s-deeptools-3.1.3.drv' may not be deterministic: output `/gnu/store/0j8200f20mp5grjkjh5kw2q9a67gw3rn-deeptools-3.1.3' differs
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
left me confused about what and what store items were
being compared exactly, and I must have went on and diff'd something not quite
right, sorry! Perhaps the store output differing should be mentioned
explicitly in the error?
The suggested command doesn't help :-(, as the ...-check output
doesn't seem to exist:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix build --check -K deeptools
The following graft will be made:
/gnu/store/mhqdaw8q8p6r3g12c95d7pmfxnmgg50j-deeptools-3.1.3.drv
applying 30 grafts for /gnu/store/mhqdaw8q8p6r3g12c95d7pmfxnmgg50j-deeptools-3.1.3.drv...
grafting '/gnu/store/f3z6fczw70j6692ddy467pbagbjck009-deeptools-3.1.3' -> '/gnu/store/9vdd6k083y8l83d8yck4wlf09pdmp1wi-deeptools-3.1.3'...
note: keeping build directory `/tmp/guix-build-deeptools-3.1.3.drv-1'
/gnu/store/9vdd6k083y8l83d8yck4wlf09pdmp1wi-deeptools-3.1.3
$ diffoscope /gnu/store/9vdd6k083y8l83d8yck4wlf09pdmp1wi-deeptools-3.1.3{,-check}
/gnu/store/6lgkzp4x3nh32n4pbkdm618wah0b0038-diffoscope-111/bin/.diffoscope-real: /gnu/store/9vdd6k083y8l83d8yck4wlf09pdmp1wi-deeptools-3.1.3-check: No such file or directory
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Maxim
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:10:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
> $ guix build --check -K deeptools
Could you try:
guix build --check -K --no-grafts deeptools
?
If deeptools is not reproducible, then it’ll leave a ‘-check’ output.
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#34934
; Package
guix
.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2019 15:04:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 34934 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello again!
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> $ guix build --check -K deeptools
>
> Could you try:
>
> guix build --check -K --no-grafts deeptools
>
> ?
>
> If deeptools is not reproducible, then it’ll leave a ‘-check’ output.
OK! The --no-grafts + --keep-failed combined did the trick, it now
produced the -check suffixed output.
There are differences regarding the number of links on many files; I'm
not sure this matters as it could be related to how the daemon optimizes
disk space in its store:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
--- /gnu/store/f3z6fczw70j6692ddy467pbagbjck009-deeptools-3.1.3
+++ /gnu/store/f3z6fczw70j6692ddy467pbagbjck009-deeptools-3.1.3-check
├── bin
│ │ --- /gnu/store/f3z6fczw70j6692ddy467pbagbjck009-deeptools-3.1.3/bin/.alignmentSieve-real
│ ├── +++ /gnu/store/f3z6fczw70j6692ddy467pbagbjck009-deeptools-3.1.3-check/bin/.alignmentSieve-real
│ │ ├── /gnu/store/5s2nib1lrd2101bbrivcl17kjx1mspw6-coreutils-8.30/bin/stat {}
│ │ │ @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
│ │ │
│ │ │ Size: 289 Blocks: 8 IO Block: 4096 regular file
│ │ │ -Links: 4
│ │ │ +Links: 1
│ │ │ Access: (0555/-r-xr-xr-x) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root)
│ │ │
│ │ │ Modify: 1970-01-01 00:00:01.000000000 +0000
│ │ │
│ │ │ Birth: -
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
There are also difference found using readelf, for example:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
│ │ │ │ ├── tree.cpython-37m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
│ │ │ │ │ ├── /gnu/store/02iklp4swqs0ipxhg5x9b2shmj6b30h1-binutils-2.31.1/bin/readelf --wide --program-header {}
│ │ │ │ │ │ @@ -3,15 +3,15 @@
│ │ │ │ │ │ Entry point 0x35d0
│ │ │ │ │ │ There are 8 program headers, starting at offset 64
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ Program Headers:
│ │ │ │ │ │ Type Offset VirtAddr PhysAddr FileSiz MemSiz Flg Align
│ │ │ │ │ │ LOAD 0x000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x002a00 0x002a00 R 0x1000
│ │ │ │ │ │ LOAD 0x003000 0x0000000000003000 0x0000000000003000 0x00616d 0x00616d R E 0x1000
│ │ │ │ │ │ - LOAD 0x00a000 0x000000000000a000 0x000000000000a000 0x002140 0x002140 R 0x1000
│ │ │ │ │ │ + LOAD 0x00a000 0x000000000000a000 0x000000000000a000 0x002144 0x002144 R 0x1000
│ │ │ │ │ │ LOAD 0x00cd78 0x000000000000dd78 0x000000000000dd78 0x000908 0x000910 RW 0x1000
│ │ │ │ │ │ DYNAMIC 0x00cd90 0x000000000000dd90 0x000000000000dd90 0x000220 0x000220 RW 0x8
│ │ │ │ │ │ GNU_EH_FRAME 0x00a9a0 0x000000000000a9a0 0x000000000000a9a0 0x0002fc 0x0002fc R 0x4
│ │ │ │ │ │ GNU_STACK 0x000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x000000 0x000000 RW 0x10
│ │ │ │ │ │ GNU_RELRO 0x00cd78 0x000000000000dd78 0x000000000000dd78 0x000288 0x000288 R 0x1
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ Section to Segment mapping:
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
These seems to have to do with Cython files which might not have been
regenerated (packaged using pre-compiled binaries). I have a fix for
this which has been used ad-hoc in the 'bedtools' package. I'll try to move it into
the Python build system and see what it gives.
The full output is attached.
Maxim
[output.gz (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
Reply sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:56:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:56:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #28 received at 34934-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
This is no longer an issue.
Closing.
Maxim
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:24:06 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 146 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.