GNU bug report logs - #52908
'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 23:54:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>

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 52908 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 52908 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Thu, 30 Dec 2021 23:54:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guix <at> gnu.org. (Thu, 30 Dec 2021 23:54:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 18:52:57 -0500
The Guix test 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux, like this:

------
+ for example in gnu/system/examples/*.tmpl    
+ grep hurd              
+ echo gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl  
+ target=                          
+ guix system -n disk-image gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl                 
accepted connection from pid 23537, user nixbld                                                 
guix system: warning: 'disk-image' is deprecated: use 'image' instead
spurious SIGPOLL               
spurious SIGPOLL                         
spurious SIGPOLL             
guix system: error: service 'xorg-server' provided more than once   
+ rm -f t-guix-system-22708 t-guix-system-error-22708 /tmp/guix-build-guix-1.3.0-17.2a49ddb.drv-0/t-guix-system-22708/config.scm /tmp/guix-build-guix-1.3.0-17.2a49ddb.drv-0/t-guix-system-22708
/my-torrc                    
+ rmdir /tmp/guix-build-guix-1.3.0-17.2a49ddb.drv-0/t-guix-system-22708
FAIL tests/guix-system.sh (exit status: 1)
------

This manifests while building the 'guix' package itself. Specifically
this derivation:

/gnu/store/i8rjwl9fmm4b6icvry8l2wlz2dwq09ic-guix-1.3.0-17.2a49ddb.drv

... which is based on commit 9f6532c77d35603f5e5d190616e0c6b1740e82bd:

https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/251537/details

It doesn't happen on x86_64-linux:

https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/251564/details




Merged 52908 52943. Request was from Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sun, 02 Jan 2022 02:15:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Tue, 04 Jan 2022 02:17:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>, Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 18:15:52 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Leo and Aiko,

This issue also affects powerpc64le-linux.

Aiko's patch would indeed fix the failing test.  Thank you, Aiko, for
taking the initiative to help investigate and solve the issue!  However,
even though that patch would fix the test, anyone who is using
set-xorg-configuration on a non-x86_64 system would still need to change
the way they call it, which is not ideal.

I've attached a different patch that attempts to fix the issue without
requiring callers of set-xorg-configuration to update their code.  I
believe this is more consistent with the intent of Ludo's original
change in commit 49599fab564f203b8e92d32e9b28c99e99849bfb.

You'll notice that this patch moves the (gnu services sddm) code into
(gnu services xorg) and deprecates (gnu services sddm).  I did this in
order to avoid a circular dependency between the two modules.  Perhaps
there's a better way.  However, many of the existing display managers
already live in (gnu services xorg), so it seemed reasonable to me.

I've verified that the tests/guix-system.sh test passes on
powerpc64le-linux after applying this patch to current master branch (on
top of commit 9309b488ca4ceef4fcc9283546e3b05c57b16ca8).  I've also
verified that the deprecation warnings are being emitted, and that the
existing bindings in (gnu services sddm) are still usable, at the REPL:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ ./pre-inst-env guix repl
GNU Guile 3.0.7
Copyright (C) 1995-2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

Guile comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `,show w'.
This program is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
under certain conditions; type `,show c' for details.

Enter `,help' for help.
scheme@(guix-user)> ,use (gnu services sddm)
scheme@(guix-user)> (sddm-configuration)
guix repl: warning: 'sddm-configuration' is deprecated, use '(@ (gnu services xorg) sddm-configuration)' instead
$1 = #<<sddm-configuration> sddm: [... omitted for brevity ...]
scheme@(guix-user)> (sddm-configuration? $1)
guix repl: warning: 'sddm-configuration?' is deprecated, use '(@ (gnu services xorg) sddm-configuration?)' instead
$2 = #t
scheme@(guix-user)> sddm-service-type
guix repl: warning: 'sddm-service-type' is deprecated, use '(@ (gnu services xorg) sddm-service-type)' instead
$3 = #<service-type sddm 4b3812c0>
scheme@(guix-user)> (sddm-service)
guix repl: warning: 'sddm-service' is deprecated, use '(@ (gnu services xorg) sddm-service)' instead
guix repl: warning: 'sddm-service' is deprecated, use 'sddm-service-type' instead
$4 = #<<service> type: #<service-type sddm 4b3812c0> value:
#<<sddm-configuration> sddm: [... omitted for brevity ...]
scheme@(guix-user)>
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

What do you think?

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[0001-services-Consistently-use-SDDM-rather-than-GDM-on-no.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Tue, 04 Jan 2022 03:44:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #13 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 20:43:27 -0700
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 7:15 PM Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Aiko's patch would indeed fix the failing test.  Thank you, Aiko, for
> taking the initiative to help investigate and solve the issue!  However,
> even though that patch would fix the test, anyone who is using
> set-xorg-configuration on a non-x86_64 system would still need to change
> the way they call it, which is not ideal.
>
> I've attached a different patch that attempts to fix the issue without
> requiring callers of set-xorg-configuration to update their code.  I
> believe this is more consistent with the intent of Ludo's original
> change in commit 49599fab564f203b8e92d32e9b28c99e99849bfb.
>
> You'll notice that this patch moves the (gnu services sddm) code into
> (gnu services xorg) and deprecates (gnu services sddm).  I did this in
> order to avoid a circular dependency between the two modules.  Perhaps
> there's a better way.  However, many of the existing display managers
> already live in (gnu services xorg), so it seemed reasonable to me.
>

I originally tried to implement this patch, but as a relative newcomer
to guix and guile scheme, I went for the easier patch of changing the
tests since I wasn't sure which would be the preferred way to fix this
issue. I'll defer to you and Leo for that judgment!

> I've verified that the tests/guix-system.sh test passes on
> powerpc64le-linux after applying this patch to current master branch (on
> top of commit 9309b488ca4ceef4fcc9283546e3b05c57b16ca8).  I've also
> verified that the deprecation warnings are being emitted, and that the
> existing bindings in (gnu services sddm) are still usable, at the REPL:
>

Commit 9309b48 seems to be a week old and I can't seem to apply this
patch on top of the latest commit on master e6fe4e5819.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Tue, 04 Jan 2022 04:54:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #16 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 20:53:22 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Aiko,

Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Commit 9309b48 seems to be a week old and I can't seem to apply this
> patch on top of the latest commit on master e6fe4e5819.

How did you apply the patch?  I was able to apply the patch locally to
commit 80ebf564e3e264a006d7c7b1f7f2e57fc2468ef1 (".guix-authorizations:
Remove Miguel Ángel Arruga Vivas due to inactivity."), which is
currently the latest commit on master.

I applied by patch by saving the MIME part to a file named "/tmp/patch".
Then I ran the following command from a clean Git checkout of commit
80ebf564e3e264a006d7c7b1f7f2e57fc2468ef1:

  git am /tmp/patch

For the record, the SHA-256 hash value of the patch file is
6650872d41068f6031633d2720553eeb05e7d650a51723dfdd2a3c2df3df294e.  If
you run "sha256sum /tmp/patch", do you see the same hash value?

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Tue, 04 Jan 2022 05:10:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #19 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 22:08:55 -0700
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 9:53 PM Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Commit 9309b48 seems to be a week old and I can't seem to apply this
> > patch on top of the latest commit on master e6fe4e5819.
>
> How did you apply the patch?
>

Without thinking apparently (i.e. using git apply). It applies just
fine, sorry for the noise. I can confirm the test passes here on
aarch64.

It would be great to get this upstreamed soon so I can start guix
pulling master. I think the guix commit and revision in
package-management.scm will also need to be bumped after applying this
fix.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Tue, 04 Jan 2022 17:29:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #22 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:28:45 -0500
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 08:43:27PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
> I'll defer to you and Leo for that judgment!

I defer to you and Chris! And I agree, let's push the fix ASAP :)




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Wed, 05 Jan 2022 10:00:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 01:58:43 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Aiko and Leo,

Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com> writes:

> It would be great to get this upstreamed soon so I can start guix
> pulling master. I think the guix commit and revision in
> package-management.scm will also need to be bumped after applying this
> fix.

It shouldn't be necessary to update the guix commit and revision in
package-management.scm.  My understanding is that "guix pull" will
install Guix at the specified commit; it does not use the guix package
to decide which version to install.  In other words, even if at the
specified commit the "guix" package is defined to use an older version
(I believe this is always the case, actually), it will not stop "guix
pull" from installing Guix at the specified commit.

If it's necessary to update the "guix" package, we can certainly do it.
However, I don't recall that it's necessary for fixing "guix pull"
problems like this.  If you still believe it's necessary, can you help
me to understand why it's necessary?

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:

> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 08:43:27PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
>> I'll defer to you and Leo for that judgment!
>
> I defer to you and Chris! And I agree, let's push the fix ASAP :)

OK.  I want to give people time to comment on the patch, but I also want
to help fix "guix pull" on master sooner rather than later.  I will
commit my patch in about 48 hours to the master branch if nobody has any
further feedback.

I don't think my patch will trigger many rebuilds.  To verify this, I
tried building coreutils on powerpc64le-linux before and after applying
my patch.  It did not trigger a rebuild of coreutils, so I don't think
it will trigger many rebuilds.  It's conceivable that some derivation
that uses the (gnu services xorg) or (gnu services sddm) modules might
change (maybe something related to Guix System?), but I don't know of an
easy way to check that.

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Wed, 05 Jan 2022 10:58:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #28 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, bug-guix <at> gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 10:47:04 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Chris,

Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:

> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> Hi Aiko and Leo,
>
> Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It would be great to get this upstreamed soon so I can start guix
>> pulling master. I think the guix commit and revision in
>> package-management.scm will also need to be bumped after applying this
>> fix.
>
> It shouldn't be necessary to update the guix commit and revision in
> package-management.scm.  My understanding is that "guix pull" will
> install Guix at the specified commit; it does not use the guix package
> to decide which version to install.  In other words, even if at the
> specified commit the "guix" package is defined to use an older version
> (I believe this is always the case, actually), it will not stop "guix
> pull" from installing Guix at the specified commit.
>
> If it's necessary to update the "guix" package, we can certainly do it.
> However, I don't recall that it's necessary for fixing "guix pull"
> problems like this.  If you still believe it's necessary, can you help
> me to understand why it's necessary?

I believe we'll have to update the package as well. For example on
aarch64 I can do a `guix pull' just fine, however `guix system reconfigure'
fails because it builds the full guix package, including running the
tests.

You've mentioned that `guix pull' was not working for you on ppc64
though right? I wonder why, is this a difference between using Guix as
the OS as opposed to a package manager on top of another OS?

Thanks,
Pierre

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Wed, 05 Jan 2022 10:58:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Wed, 05 Jan 2022 17:35:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #34 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 10:34:11 -0700
On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 2:58 AM Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > It would be great to get this upstreamed soon so I can start guix
> > pulling master. I think the guix commit and revision in
> > package-management.scm will also need to be bumped after applying this
> > fix.
>
> It shouldn't be necessary to update the guix commit and revision in
> package-management.scm.  My understanding is that "guix pull" will
> install Guix at the specified commit; it does not use the guix package
> to decide which version to install.  In other words, even if at the
> specified commit the "guix" package is defined to use an older version
> (I believe this is always the case, actually), it will not stop "guix
> pull" from installing Guix at the specified commit.
>
> If it's necessary to update the "guix" package, we can certainly do it.
> However, I don't recall that it's necessary for fixing "guix pull"
> problems like this.  If you still believe it's necessary, can you help
> me to understand why it's necessary?
>

I actually encountered this issue not doing a "guix pull" but in doing
a "guix system reconfigure" after a guix pull. I don't really
understand why, but I think guix system reconfigure will continue to
fail until the "guix" package is updated. I may be totally incorrect
here though as I'm still new to this.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 07:29:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #37 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>, Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, leo <at> famulari.name
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 23:28:40 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Pierre and Aiko,

Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com> writes:

> I believe we'll have to update the package as well. For example on
> aarch64 I can do a `guix pull' just fine, however `guix system reconfigure'
> fails because it builds the full guix package, including running the
> tests.
>
> You've mentioned that `guix pull' was not working for you on ppc64
> though right? I wonder why, is this a difference between using Guix as
> the OS as opposed to a package manager on top of another OS?

Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I actually encountered this issue not doing a "guix pull" but in doing
> a "guix system reconfigure" after a guix pull. I don't really
> understand why, but I think guix system reconfigure will continue to
> fail until the "guix" package is updated. I may be totally incorrect
> here though as I'm still new to this.

You're right.  I was confused.

I incorrectly thought that Leo and Aiko were saying that they couldn't
run "guix pull".  However, Leo's original message (on Thu, 30 Dec 2021)
explained that the problem occurred for him while building the "guix"
package, not while running "guix pull".  In fact, I've just confirmed
that "guix pull" DOES work for me on powerpc64le-linux using commit
b9c5dff57ff961a16c8fc24843a4535ea817e732.  I ran this command:

  guix pull --cores=14 --commit=b9c5dff57ff961a16c8fc24843a4535ea817e732 --profile=/tmp/test-pull-b9c5dff57

I'm not sure why I was confused, but I apologize.  The "guix pull"
command actually works fine on powerpc64le-linux.  However, the "guix"
package fails to build, exactly as described in this bug report.

So, I agree: in addition to the patch, we do also need to update the
guix package.  To that end, when I commit the patch to the master branch
in about 24 hours, I will also add two commits to update the "guix"
package twice, since the comment in the "guix" package (added in commit
c0a693dfec3e0c3361dab40f354966730dde4ef3) explains that it must be
updated twice:

  ;; If you are updating this package because it fails to build, you need to
  ;; actually update it *twice*, as the installer is pointing to the N-1 guix
  ;; package revision.

I'll let you know once I've done that.

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 16:40:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #40 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 17:39:45 +0100
Hi,

Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> I've attached a different patch that attempts to fix the issue without
> requiring callers of set-xorg-configuration to update their code.  I
> believe this is more consistent with the intent of Ludo's original
> change in commit 49599fab564f203b8e92d32e9b28c99e99849bfb.

[...]

> From 09091cc8495e0b4c302a58961e79ac8455ecd208 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 14:59:35 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] services: Consistently use SDDM rather than GDM on
>  non-x86_64.
>
> This is a follow-up to 49599fab564f203b8e92d32e9b28c99e99849bfb.  Notably, it
> also deprecates (gnu services sddm) and moves what was there into (gnu
> services xorg).
>
> Fixes: <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52908>.

I’d rather not move things and fix the bug in the same commit.  (I’m not
even convinced sddm needs to leave its own module, plus it would break
the API, which is not something to do lightly.)

[...]

>  (define* (set-xorg-configuration config
>                                   #:optional
>                                   (login-manager-service-type
> -                                  gdm-service-type))
> +                                  (let ((system (or (%current-target-system)
> +                                                    (%current-system))))
> +                                    (if (string-prefix? "x86_64" system)
> +                                        gdm-service-type
> +                                        sddm-service-type))))

[...]

> --- a/gnu/system/examples/vm-image.tmpl
> +++ b/gnu/system/examples/vm-image.tmpl
> @@ -107,12 +107,12 @@ root ALL=(ALL) ALL
>                   ;; Use the DHCP client service rather than NetworkManager.
>                   (service dhcp-client-service-type))
>  
> -           ;; Remove GDM, ModemManager, NetworkManager, and wpa-supplicant,
> -           ;; which don't make sense in a VM.
> +           ;; Remove some services that don't make sense in a VM.
>             (remove (lambda (service)
>                       (let ((type (service-kind service)))
>                         (or (memq type
>                                   (list gdm-service-type
> +                                       sddm-service-type

These bits LGTM.

Thanks for fixing it!

And yes, we’ll need to update the ‘guix’ package once this fix is in.

Ludo’.




Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Fri, 07 Jan 2022 04:33:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #43 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Aiko Kyle
 <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 20:32:23 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Ludo and Aiko,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> I’d rather not move things and fix the bug in the same commit.  (I’m not
> even convinced sddm needs to leave its own module, plus it would break
> the API, which is not something to do lightly.)

You're right!  I was able to avoid moving the (gnu services sddm) module
by autoloading it from (gnu services xorg).  I've committed the fix as
79260c8695cc5e3cd64f5b01e262369d5a67f141, along with two commits that
update the guix package.

> Thanks for fixing it!
>
> And yes, we’ll need to update the ‘guix’ package once this fix is in.

Thank you for the review!

Aiko, can you confirm that after running "guix pull" the issue is
resolved on your end, too?

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[0001-services-Consistently-use-SDDM-rather-than-GDM-on-no.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Fri, 07 Jan 2022 10:49:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #46 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>, Ludovic
 Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2022 11:48:22 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Chris Marusich schreef op do 06-01-2022 om 20:32 [-0800]:
> +                                    (if (string-prefix? "x86_64"
> system)

There's a target-x86-64? procedure in (guix utils) you could use here.

Greetings,
Maxime
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Sat, 08 Jan 2022 01:27:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #49 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:26:13 -0700
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 9:32 PM Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Aiko, can you confirm that after running "guix pull" the issue is
> resolved on your end, too?
>

I can confirm that this test passes here. However guix system
reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the test
'file-needed/recursive' in tests/gremlin.scm failing. There was an
email on guix-devel starting to look into this issue on aarch64 but I
haven't had the time to follow up.




Reply sent to Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 08 Jan 2022 02:19:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 08 Jan 2022 02:19:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #54 received at 52908-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>, 52908-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 21:18:39 -0500
On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 06:26:13PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
> I can confirm that this test passes here.

Awesome, I am closing this bug. Thanks everybody, for collaborating on a
quick fix!

> However guix system
> reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the test
> 'file-needed/recursive' in tests/gremlin.scm failing. There was an
> email on guix-devel starting to look into this issue on aarch64 but I
> haven't had the time to follow up.

I think there is a fix being discussed here:

https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52940




Reply sent to Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 08 Jan 2022 02:19:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 08 Jan 2022 02:19:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Disconnected #52943 from all other report(s). Request was from Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sun, 09 Jan 2022 02:41:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#52908; Package guix. (Sun, 09 Jan 2022 04:43:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #64 received at 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>, Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52908 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52908: 'tests/guix-system.sh' fails on aarch64-linux
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2022 20:42:35 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Maxime, Aiko, and Leo,

Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> writes:

> Chris Marusich schreef op do 06-01-2022 om 20:32 [-0800]:
>> +                                    (if (string-prefix? "x86_64"
>> system)
>
> There's a target-x86-64? procedure in (guix utils) you could use here.
>
> Greetings,
> Maxime

Good call!  I implemented your suggestion in commit dc2b901.

Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 9:32 PM Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Aiko, can you confirm that after running "guix pull" the issue is
>> resolved on your end, too?
>>
>
> I can confirm that this test passes here. However guix system
> reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the test
> 'file-needed/recursive' in tests/gremlin.scm failing. There was an
> email on guix-devel starting to look into this issue on aarch64 but I
> haven't had the time to follow up.

Thank you for confirming!

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:

> On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 06:26:13PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
> > I can confirm that this test passes here.
> 
> Awesome, I am closing this bug. Thanks everybody, for collaborating on a
> quick fix!
> 
> > However guix system
> > reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the test
> > 'file-needed/recursive' in tests/gremlin.scm failing. There was an
> > email on guix-devel starting to look into this issue on aarch64 but I
> > haven't had the time to follow up.
> 
> I think there is a fix being discussed here:
> 
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52940

I think the issue described in 52940 is similar but slightly different
to the one Aiko mentioned.  I have resolved 52940 because that issue
(only happening on powerpc64le-linux, to my knowledge) has been fixed.
However, I have re-opened Aiko's existing report for the
aarch64-specific issue here:

https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52943

Let's continue the discussion of that issue there.

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sun, 06 Feb 2022 12:24:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 2 years and 51 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.