GNU bug report logs - #53581
[PATCH 1/8] gnu: libdrm: Update to 2.4.109.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:44:01 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 53581 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 53581 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 guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#53581; Package guix-patches. (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:44:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to guix-patches <at> gnu.org. (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:44:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

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

From: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>
To: Guix Patches <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] gnu: libdrm: Update to 2.4.109.
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:43:13 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,

here is a patch set to update the sway window manager to latest version 1.7.

Since it updates wayland packages and libdrm is there a way how to test all the packages which are effected?

Currently I list the affected packages like this:

./pre-inst-env guix refresh --list-dependent <UPDATED PACKAGES>

I can use sed to remove the versions and also remove guix-minimal from the list
sed "s/@[-\.a-zA-Z0-9]* / /g" | sed "s/guix-minimal//g"

Finally I call the build itself
xargs ./pre-inst-env guix build

Since it touches lots of packages I expect it will go to core-updates, right? Should I mark the patches somehow (next time)?

There is package xf86-video-freedreno, but it also fails to build without the patches and by quick check the last commit is ~5yrs old.

Also should I test all the packages to build? I stopped at ungoogled-chromium as that requires a lot of resources and time.
----
Petr
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]
[0001-gnu-libdrm-Update-to-2.4.109.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0002-gnu-wayland-Update-to-1.20.0.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0006-gnu-cagebreak-Update-to-1.8.3.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0003-gnu-wayland-protocols-Update-to-1.24.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0005-gnu-sway-Update-to-1.7.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0008-gnu-hikari-Update-to-2.3.3.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0004-gnu-wlroots-Update-to-0.15.0.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[0007-gnu-dwl-Update-to-0.2.2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#53581; Package guix-patches. (Sun, 17 Apr 2022 02:27:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>
To: 53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: "marius <at> gnu.org" <marius <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#53581: Acknowledgement ([PATCH 1/8] gnu: libdrm: Update to
 2.4.109.)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2022 02:26:06 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,

here are updated patches rebased on core-update branch.

----
Petr

[v2-0001-gnu-libdrm-Update-to-2.4.110.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0006-gnu-cagebreak-Update-to-1.8.3.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0003-gnu-wayland-protocols-Update-to-1.24.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0008-gnu-hikari-Update-to-2.3.3.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0005-gnu-sway-Update-to-1.7.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0009-gnu-hikari-Simplify-inputs.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0004-gnu-wlroots-Update-to-0.15.1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0007-gnu-dwl-Update-to-0.3.1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
[v2-0002-gnu-wayland-Update-to-1.20.0.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#53581; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 20 Jun 2022 18:43:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>
To: "53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Ping
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2022 18:42:31 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,

could somebody have a look at the patches?

FIY: I will test them on the latest core-updates as some time has pasted but recently openssl (both the 1.x.x and 3.x.x) is failing due to expired certs so I'm waiting for 21.6.2022 as the new release with fixes should come and then I'll also rebase these patches.

Thanks,
Petr
[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#53581; Package guix-patches. (Tue, 21 Jun 2022 05:32:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: "53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Ping
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 07:31:40 +0200
Hi!

phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com> skribis:

> could somebody have a look at the patches?

It all LGTM.

> FIY: I will test them on the latest core-updates as some time has pasted but recently openssl (both the 1.x.x and 3.x.x) is failing due to expired certs so I'm waiting for 21.6.2022 as the new release with fixes should come and then I'll also rebase these patches.

Same here: I was going to test them and then stumbled upon that OpenSSL
test failure.  I’ll see if we can update it or workaround the issue.

To be continued…

Ludo’.




Reply sent to Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Wed, 22 Jun 2022 10:42:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Wed, 22 Jun 2022 10:42:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #19 received at 53581-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: "53581 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <53581-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#53581: [PATCH 1/8] gnu: libdrm: Update to 2.4.109.
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:41:23 +0200
Hi,

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

> phodina <phodina <at> protonmail.com> skribis:
>
>> could somebody have a look at the patches?
>
> It all LGTM.
>
>> FIY: I will test them on the latest core-updates as some time has pasted but recently openssl (both the 1.x.x and 3.x.x) is failing due to expired certs so I'm waiting for 21.6.2022 as the new release with fixes should come and then I'll also rebase these patches.
>
> Same here: I was going to test them and then stumbled upon that OpenSSL
> test failure.  I’ll see if we can update it or workaround the issue.

Done:

  https://issues.guix.gnu.org/56137

I pushed the whole series as a589049e141588ebcf4079116e378d60b779f6b4 on
‘core-updates’.  Note that not everything had been built by the time I
pushed, so please keep an eye on it and let me know if anything’s amiss.

Thanks and apologies for the delay!

Ludo’.




bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Wed, 20 Jul 2022 11:24:09 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 1 year and 252 days ago.

Previous Next


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