GNU logs - #45826, boring messages

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 21:05:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B.161048547312602 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:04:12 -0500
From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
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-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.

Message sent:

Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Subject: bug#45826: Acknowledgement (SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to
 build on aarch64)
Message-ID: <handler.45826.B.161048547312602.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN>
X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 45826
X-Gnu-PR-Package: guix
Reply-To: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 21:05:01 +0000

Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org.

This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.

Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course.

Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
 bug-guix@HIDDEN

If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please
send it to 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish
to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.

--=20
45826: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D45826
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 21:05:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.161057185719982 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
References: <X/4OzGVFmWjm37kM@HIDDEN>
User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1
From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
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"
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

--=-=-=
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-----
--=-=-=--

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 23:26:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.161058031917384 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:25:09 -0500
From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
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>
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

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 :/

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 09:44:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.161079019014084 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45826
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 45826-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B45826.161079019014084
          (code B ref 45826); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 09:44:02 +0000
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2021 09:43:10 +0000
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>
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-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-----
--=-=-=--

Message received at control <at> debbugs.gnu.org:

Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2021 18:57:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 16 13:57:17 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44057 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1l0qlB-00033n-AN
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:17 -0500
Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]:36423)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1l0ql9-00033a-Nw
 for control <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:16 -0500
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43])
 by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A0D01666;
 Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163])
 by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:09 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name;
 h=date:from:to:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=mesmtp;
 bh=TcEs9W+W5w/g3w1t4B87B7bVoQ/V1X+MFbOArr/iyFk=; b=Tnv2ws1PmBIB
 jWMdyzweey1ZxU7jwsI8AxQuKkO3e4w89r11h/6aI6ZrEctgu9eUM6u39oyLM2f1
 LBobU49rAtaPbRX4CDEUacQ4tttThLrtA+eyThVY269OPxfEvsSKfCwyQZUOep/H
 6G65ZMjeLARFsi+t7xdsrSW5B5mNdTk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id
 :mime-version:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender
 :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=TcEs9W+W5w/g3w1t4B87B7bVoQ/V1X+MFbOArr/iy
 Fk=; b=gORG5HBecOZuDkblXWl0KwHyYaPFDVK3S6Hr0igVeAPe28zShRRJGUYoK
 tApTzer6HKaZx7utEje7wRBmQNGzAgEq9GGGEBIT44odpJj1UUCg0phBEMei2PXq
 x7k2XHSvgQKWvAqI/GyA+ZX4iFSOl92ePTvx/u4FSXjDo7NL5FKjSQ8UrffyrTMN
 c9woJXf4OBYkjiVJ1ZQ1KKrB5GSEH41RfQDiyppUTJaw7TxWGtCJ9KrnTUSV57QR
 BaGjubKnSqkFVxLCNXVYxy3mfxEXTTK4r1y20Im7kodbEUSnM+MAMQHLWhUknRiI
 eeuoWwlejvpKAkwliPwKaEdeJroAQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:BTcDYOH9rmTc-LrakNebsozhQ7dHnp-5wTxmI7YBafi5lRJAGGGf7w>
 <xme:BTcDYPVa_IegdDxVBaPUylFQc23Q3pTp8wo19X7WzltsdvHznBnmM_vwzO7FvX-Bn
 WQ2aZuK12l3KtUI1w>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrtdeggdduvdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucfgmhhpthihuchsuhgsjhgvtghtucdluddtmdenuc
 fjughrpeffhffvkfggtggusehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfhrghmuhhl
 rghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpe
 fhjeeigfefvedvfeetheegledtkeevuddtgedtudeiteehteegvdefffduffefffenucfk
 phepuddttddruddurdduieelrdduudeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrg
 hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:BTcDYIIwZ-eACxW0pbIgjLwgj0mkFF4LUT4UZGf41tNQ4HjlUF8sNw>
 <xmx:BTcDYIHfP_XKZxxw8O97TQrH-3ZoTceoBehOaDAj6LGhDgjGUhEzPw>
 <xmx:BTcDYEXUL_RhehqQKUu96c7l8MuzxmUWf0EHOVpoY_7yQdetirlWRA>
 <xmx:BTcDYMjjEqf-lYk-1Utn0UalYtzsXwfMKlo1O6NrhmYye6v1r1JBLQ>
Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net
 [100.11.169.118])
 by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 03D931080057
 for <control <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:57:07 -0500
From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
To: control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Message-ID: <YAM3A2TGLFReD1Ys@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 Content preview: retitle 45826 "build-system compiler failures are not cached
 as expected by Cuirass" 
 Content analysis details:   (3.3 points, 10.0 required)
 pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS          SPF: HELO matches SPF record
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 low trust [64.147.123.24 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4      RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
 [64.147.123.24 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT        Missing Subject: header
 0.2 NO_SUBJECT             Extra score for no subject
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
 2.0 BODY_EMPTY             No body text in message
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control
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: 2.3 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  retitle 45826 "build-system compiler failures are not cached
    as expected by Cuirass" 
 
 Content analysis details:   (2.3 points, 10.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4      RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
                             [64.147.123.24 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
                             low trust
                             [64.147.123.24 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS          SPF: HELO matches SPF record
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT        Missing Subject: header
  0.2 NO_SUBJECT             Extra score for no subject
 -1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI     Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
                             manager
  0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
  2.0 BODY_EMPTY             No body text in message

retitle 45826 "build-system compiler failures are not cached as expected by Cuirass"

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 18:59:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.161082353111921 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45826
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 45826-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B45826.161082353111921
          (code B ref 45826); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 18:59:02 +0000
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2021 18:58:51 +0000
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>
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-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-----
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=Hgrh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--E5hvDICIZM5BvgE4--

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 09:30:03 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.16108758003418 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45826
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>, 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, mail@HIDDEN, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 45826-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B45826.16108758003418
          (code B ref 45826); Sun, 17 Jan 2021 09:30:03 +0000
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 09:30:00 +0000
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>
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-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

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:37:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.161088336215401 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45826
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>
Cc: 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 45826-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B45826.161088336215401
          (code B ref 45826); Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:37:02 +0000
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 11:36:02 +0000
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>
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-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-----
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=ZWAI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--

Message sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64
Resent-From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 19:12:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.45826.B45826.16109106839252 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45826
X-GNU-PR-Package: guix
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe@HIDDEN>
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN>, 45826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, mail@HIDDEN, guix-sysadmin@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 45826-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B45826.16109106839252
          (code B ref 45826); Sun, 17 Jan 2021 19:12:02 +0000
Received: (at 45826) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2021 19:11:23 +0000
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>
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-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.

Last modified: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 19:15:01 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.