GNU bug report logs -
#43367
[core-updates]: [PATCH 0/5]: Prevent wrap-progam from double-wrapping.
Previous Next
Reported by: Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:40:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 43367 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 43367 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:40:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:40:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
I'm attempting to fix a bug where wrap-program produces ..X-real-real
files by mistakenly wrapping already wrapped files. I haven't fully
tested these because it requires rebuilding everything which takes hours
to days and core-updates is stuck on mesa now anyway. Perhaps I'll try
testing on master. Also there may be other places where .X-real files
are accidentally wrapped, which will now error.
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
* guix/build/utils.scm: (wrap-program): Error if wrap-program was
mistakenly passed a .X-real file. This prevents and forces us to fix
cases where a double wrapped ..X-real-real file is created, such as can
be seen with:
find /gnu/ -iname '.*-real-real'
---
guix/build/utils.scm | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/guix/build/utils.scm b/guix/build/utils.scm
index e872cfffd3..822191f4de 100644
--- a/guix/build/utils.scm
+++ b/guix/build/utils.scm
@@ -1194,6 +1194,9 @@ with definitions for VARS."
(format #f "export ~a=\"$~a${~a:+:}~a\""
var var var (string-join rest ":")))))
+ (when (wrapped-program? prog)
+ (error (string-append prog " is a wrapper. Refusing to wrap.")))
+
(if already-wrapped?
;; PROG is already a wrapper: add the new "export VAR=VALUE" lines just
--
2.28.0
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
* guix/build/utils.scm (wrap-program): The wrapper? procedure is
incorrectly named as it actually checks to see if prog is the
original program that was moved, not the wrapper.
* guix/build/python-build-system: (wrap): Use renamed wrapped-program?.
---
guix/build/python-build-system.scm | 2 +-
guix/build/utils.scm | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/guix/build/python-build-system.scm b/guix/build/python-build-system.scm
index 62e7a7b305..d1dbbc1de2 100644
--- a/guix/build/python-build-system.scm
+++ b/guix/build/python-build-system.scm
@@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ when running checks after installing the package."
(define (list-of-files dir)
(find-files dir (lambda (file stat)
(and (eq? 'regular (stat:type stat))
- (not (wrapper? file))))))
+ (not (wrapped-program? file))))))
(define bindirs
(append-map (match-lambda
diff --git a/guix/build/utils.scm b/guix/build/utils.scm
index 822191f4de..4cd227a668 100644
--- a/guix/build/utils.scm
+++ b/guix/build/utils.scm
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@
patch-/usr/bin/file
fold-port-matches
remove-store-references
- wrapper?
+ wrapped-program?
wrap-program
wrap-script
@@ -1118,8 +1118,8 @@ known as `nuke-refs' in Nixpkgs."
(program wrap-error-program)
(type wrap-error-type))
-(define (wrapper? prog)
- "Return #t if PROG is a wrapper as produced by 'wrap-program'."
+(define (wrapped-program? prog)
+ "Return #t if PROG is a program that was moved and wrapped by 'wrap-program'."
(and (file-exists? prog)
(let ((base (basename prog)))
(and (string-prefix? "." base)
--
2.28.0
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
* guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm (wrap-all-programs): If a
package definition was modified to insert an additional wrap phase
before glib-or-gtk...'s wrap phase instead of after, glib-or-gtk...'s
wrap phase will double wrap the .X-real file from the earlier wrap
phase. Filtering out such wrapped programs means these .X-real files
should fix this and mean packagers don't have to worry about ensuring
their wrap phases are put afterwards.
---
guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm b/guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm
index ba680fd1a9..ccb3138fe2 100644
--- a/guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm
+++ b/guix/build/glib-or-gtk-build-system.scm
@@ -142,8 +142,9 @@ add a dependency of that output on GLib and GTK+."
(unless (member output glib-or-gtk-wrap-excluded-outputs)
(let* ((bindir (string-append directory "/bin"))
(libexecdir (string-append directory "/libexec"))
- (bin-list (append (find-files bindir ".*")
- (find-files libexecdir ".*")))
+ (bin-list (filter (negate wrapped-program?)
+ (append (find-files bindir ".*")
+ (find-files libexecdir ".*"))))
(datadirs (data-directories
(alist-cons output directory inputs)))
(gtk-mod-dirs (gtk-module-directories
--
2.28.0
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:47:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
* guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm (wrap): Don't return any potential
already wrapped-programs in the list-of-files to wrap.
---
guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm b/guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm
index dbdeb1ccd2..b2c090f946 100644
--- a/guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm
+++ b/guix/build/rakudo-build-system.scm
@@ -97,7 +97,8 @@
(map (cut string-append dir "/" <>)
(or (scandir dir (lambda (f)
(let ((s (stat (string-append dir "/" f))))
- (eq? 'regular (stat:type s)))))
+ (and (eq? 'regular (stat:type s))
+ (not (wrapped-program? f))))))
'())))
(define bindirs
--
2.28.0
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 05:47:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
* guix/build/qt-build-system.scm (wrap-all-programs): Excluded wrapped
programs from the list of files to wrap if they exist to avoid double
wrapping.
---
guix/build/qt-build-system.scm | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/guix/build/qt-build-system.scm b/guix/build/qt-build-system.scm
index 005157b0a4..4738ca09c9 100644
--- a/guix/build/qt-build-system.scm
+++ b/guix/build/qt-build-system.scm
@@ -83,7 +83,10 @@ add a dependency of that output on Qt."
(define (find-files-to-wrap directory)
(append-map
(lambda (dir)
- (if (directory-exists? dir) (find-files dir ".*") (list)))
+ (if (directory-exists? dir)
+ (find-files dir (lambda (file stat)
+ (not (wrapped-program? file))))
+ '()))
(list (string-append directory "/bin")
(string-append directory "/sbin")
(string-append directory "/libexec")
--
2.28.0
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 09:41:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sun, 13 Sep 2020 15:39:15 +1000
Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot> wrote:
> I'm attempting to fix a bug where wrap-program produces ..X-real-real
> files by mistakenly wrapping already wrapped files. I haven't fully
> tested these because it requires rebuilding everything which takes hours
> to days and core-updates is stuck on mesa now anyway. Perhaps I'll try
> testing on master. Also there may be other places where .X-real files
> are accidentally wrapped, which will now error.
But can't a thing be wrapped once for one reason and another time for another
reason and that should be fine?
[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
guix-patches <at> gnu.org
:
bug#43367
; Package
guix-patches
.
(Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:31:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 43367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 13/9/20 7:40 pm, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Sep 2020 15:39:15 +1000
> Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot> wrote:
>
>> I'm attempting to fix a bug where wrap-program produces ..X-real-real
>> files by mistakenly wrapping already wrapped files. I haven't fully
>> tested these because it requires rebuilding everything which takes hours
>> to days and core-updates is stuck on mesa now anyway. Perhaps I'll try
>> testing on master. Also there may be other places where .X-real files
>> are accidentally wrapped, which will now error.
> But can't a thing be wrapped once for one reason and another time for another
> reason and that should be fine?
Yes, perhaps I should have explained that this is still possible and
works fine. When a program is wrapped a second time, it will append to
the existed wrapper, rather than creating a new file and moving the old
one. repeated applications of wrap-program after the first one simply
append. I'll illustrate how this can go wrong though: suppose we have
/bin/foo and we we are in a repl and run:
(wrap-program "/bin/foo" `("BAR" = ("baz")) => /bin/.foo-real doesn't
exist so /bin/foo is moved to /bin/.foo-real, a new /bin/foo is created
that is a wrapper that then launches /bin.foo-real.
(wrap-program "/bin/foo" `("BAR" = ("baz")) => /bin/.foo-real exists so
/bin/foo is assumed to already be a wrapper so variables are appended to
/bin/foo.
(wrap-program "/bin/foo" `("BAR" = ("baz")) => same thing again,
variables are appended
; Now suppose we then run:
(wrap-program "/bin/.foo-real" `("BAR" = ("baz")) =>
/bin/..foo-real-real doesn't exist, so /bin/.foo-real is moved to
/bin/..foo-real-real and /bin/.foo-real is created again as another wrapper.
This should never be done intentionally I think, but sometimes there is
code that uses (find-files dir ".") to find binaries to wrap, and this
is run after a previous existing wrap phase, so the both /bin/foo and
/bin/.foo-real are wrapped again. Generally everything will continue
working though despite all this though.
You run this to find some of these double wrapped packages:
find /gnu/ -maxdepth 4 -iname '.*-real-real'
So I thought it best to error whenever this happens instead of allowing it.
An example of this causing an issue is when Prafulla Giri posted a
patch[0] to fix a bug with Calibre. Their code ought to be correct, but
it resulted in double wrapping. I created my own patch by overwriting
the python-build-systems wrap phase and duplicating some code. Andreas
ended up accepting my patch instead.
... Actually I just realised Prafulla's patch could have been fixed in a
much simpler way by adjusting the (find-files ...) bit and avoided
duplication. ...
Anyway, with these patches, Prafulla's patch would have caused an error
and forced them to fix it, for example, by changing
(find-files "." ".")
to
(find-files "." (lambda (file stat) (not (wrapper? file))))
or
(find-files "." (lambda (file stat) (not (string-prefix "." (basename file))))
----------
So, the main change here is making (wrap-program ".foo-real") an error.
If you cannot think of a good reason why that should ever be run, I
think its good to block it. bugs that can slip through easily and lurk
in the background usually not causing problems are not good in my
opinion. After that has been decided we need to ensure all build systems
don't misuse wrap-program that way. I notice some build systems actually
only pass 'regular files, others allow symlinks or any file. I'm not
really sure what the exact find-files filter should be.
[0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2020-09/msg00219.html
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]
Reply sent
to
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:07:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:07:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #31 received at 43367-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Brendan,
Brendan Tildesley <mail <at> brendan.scot> skribis:
> I'm attempting to fix a bug where wrap-program produces ..X-real-real
> files by mistakenly wrapping already wrapped files. I haven't fully
> tested these because it requires rebuilding everything which takes
> hours to days and core-updates is stuck on mesa now anyway. Perhaps
> I'll try testing on master. Also there may be other places where
> .X-real files are accidentally wrapped, which will now error.
The patch series LGTM and I’ve applied it on ‘core-updates’. I’m
building things now and will push shortly if everything goes well.
Thank you and sorry for the loooong delay!
Ludo’.
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 20 May 2021 11:24:08 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 340 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.