GNU bug report logs - #45962
‘binutils-mesboot0’ includes non-zero timestamps in ar archives

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 45962 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#45962: ‘binutils-mesboot0’ includes non-zero timestamps in ar archives
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 11:39:04 -0500

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
> Hello!
>
>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> skribis:
>>
>>> On #bootstrappable, mid-kid reported that ‘binutils-mesboot0’ in
>>> commencement.scm lacks ‘--enable-deterministic-archives’.  So I checked
>>> if this had an effect by running:
>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Apparently Binutils 2.14 didn’t have ‘--enable-deterministic-archives’
>>> so we’ll have to patch it.
>>
>> Sikonas on #bootstrappable provided a patch for that (thanks!) so I went
>> ahead and gave it a try on ‘core-updates’ (Guix patch attached).
>
> Great!
>
>> The binutils source gets patched and repacked, but then decompressing it
>> fails:
>
> [..]
>
>> Maxime, does that ring a bell?  Could it be that this bootstrap ‘xz’ is
>> less capable, or could it be a Gash-Utils bug?
>
> Currently, we avoid using non-bootstrapped binaries in the bootstrap,
> that includes 'xz'; earlier in the bootstrap that includes also 'patch'.
>
> See also gcc-core-mesboot0: it applies the patch in a manual phase.  So
> I'm not sure if we want to start depending on 'xz' an this stage?

I see; so what Ludovic got surprised by is the fact that when adding
patches or a snippet to an origin it gets repacked as an xz tarball.
That's nothing new (it's how it is on the master branch too); but it can
indeed be surprising.

Maxim

Previous Next

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