GNU bug report logs -
#44559
gnutls 3.6.12 fails to build: FAIL: status-request-revoked
Previous Next
Reported by: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:50:02 UTC
Severity: important
Tags: moreinfo
Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Hi,
Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> skribis:
> On Fri, 2021-02-19 at 16:33 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> [...]
>> Longer-term, we need to find a way to address or avoid this issue. A
>> brute-force approach would be to have the build machines at ci.guix run
>> with a clock ten years ahead. That should generally be fine since the
>> only place where timestamps matter are unmodified upstream tarballs. In
>> all other cases, mtime is set to 1.
>
> Alternatively, could the build container be adjusted to always begin at
> 1970-01-01, using ‘time namespaces’?
>
> Linux: https://lwn.net/Articles/766089/
Unfortunately, time namespaces are just for CLOCK_{MONOTONIC,BOOTTIME},
which I think is of little use here:
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/44559#3
> Also, is there any particular reason to set the clock only ten years ahead,
> and not, say, a millenia or two? Some possible reasons:
>
> * year 2038,2446 problem: the ext2 and ext4 filesystems have a restricted
> date range
> * year 2038 problem: https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/gnumach-doc/Host-Interface.html#Host-Interface
>
> IMO, the year 2038 problem is a bug and affected packages should simply be fixed.
> But perhaps reality is a little more complicated.
Yeah, one problem at a time. :-)
Setting it 10 years ahead would cache the kind of issue we’re talking
about, while not opening the Y2038 can of worms. I think we need to try
that out and see how it goes.
Ludo’.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 363 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.