GNU bug report logs - #52943
Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 52943 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 52943 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

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

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure after commit
 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 16:54:51 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

I'm new to guix so I'm really struggling to debug this strange issue.
On the latest master I can run 'guix pull', and the latest guix seems
to build just fine, however when I go to do 'guix system reconfigure',
building guix fails the check phase. I've attached the log file. After
some help on IRC, I understand that during 'guix system reconfigure'
ends up building a previous version of itself via the "boot-stripping"
process in gnu/packages/package-management.scm. I followed this linked
list of commits backwards and found that commits prior to commit
224d437fb4 which updates this guix package definition to version 14
which is commit 2a621f1 build just fine, however all the versions of
that package afterwards fail at the same place during 'guix system
reconfigure', in the check phase, with the same tests failing. At this
point, I think I lack sufficient knowledge of guix to debug this issue
further and it looks like cuirass is so backlogged on aarch64 that is
still hasn't gotten to building these guix versions so I can't compare
with it's build attempts. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I'd
really like to be running the latest guix from master.

Thanks!

[7w4qq23xj1jhk0972x7q8s5q918pl3-guix-1.3.0-14.2a621f1.drv (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 21:13:54 -0500

On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 04:54:51PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
> I'm new to guix so I'm really struggling to debug this strange issue.
> On the latest master I can run 'guix pull', and the latest guix seems
> to build just fine, however when I go to do 'guix system reconfigure',
> building guix fails the check phase. I've attached the log file. After
> some help on IRC, I understand that during 'guix system reconfigure'
> ends up building a previous version of itself via the "boot-stripping"
> process in gnu/packages/package-management.scm. I followed this linked
> list of commits backwards and found that commits prior to commit
> 224d437fb4 which updates this guix package definition to version 14
> which is commit 2a621f1 build just fine, however all the versions of
> that package afterwards fail at the same place during 'guix system
> reconfigure', in the check phase, with the same tests failing. At this
> point, I think I lack sufficient knowledge of guix to debug this issue
> further and it looks like cuirass is so backlogged on aarch64 that is
> still hasn't gotten to building these guix versions so I can't compare
> with it's build attempts. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I'd
> really like to be running the latest guix from master.

Thanks, this has already been reported as
<https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52908>

Message #13 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 21:11:49 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Attached is the output of guix system shepherd-graph
gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl on commit 2a49ddb513

[graph.dot (application/msword, attachment)]

Message #16 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 23:51:34 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 09:11:49PM -0700, Aiko Kyle wrote:
> Attached is the output of guix system shepherd-graph
> gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl on commit 2a49ddb513

Thanks, and I've attached a graph of the same operating system
declaration from the same revision of Guix but for x86_64, along with
rendered images of both graphs.

The graphs clearly show that xorg-server is provided in two places on
aarch64. The question is why?

[graph-x86_64 (text/plain, attachment)]

[graph-x86_64.png (image/png, attachment)]

[graph-aarch64.png (image/png, attachment)]

Message #19 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 23:36:14 -0700

On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 9:51 PM Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> wrote:
>
> Thanks, and I've attached a graph of the same operating system
> declaration from the same revision of Guix but for x86_64, along with
> rendered images of both graphs.
>
> The graphs clearly show that xorg-server is provided in two places on
> aarch64. The question is why?

Thanks Leo for the help on IRC!

What we seem to have figured out is that commit 49599fab56 is almost
certainly the culprit. So the issue is that somehow using
sddm-service-type in %desktop-services on aarch64 instead of
gdm-service-type which is used an x86_64 after that commit results in
xorg-server-service-type being included twice, likely though
gdm-service-type still being included somewhere.
set-xorg-configuration is a potential culprit, although so far I
haven't' been able to make the test pass by modifying the call to
set-xorg-configuration in desktop.tmpl to explicitly pass
sddm-service-type.

Message #22 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Akira Kyle <akira <at> akirakyle.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 14:38:01 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

The attached patch fixes the failing guix-system.sh test on aarch64.
However there are now other tests that are failing.

[0001-tests-guix-system-Fix-on-non-x86_64-systems.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #25 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Akira Kyle <akira <at> akirakyle.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 18:13:14 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Attached is the current log file for the test suite on commit 92faad0
with the patch applied.

[test-suite.log (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #28 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Akira Kyle <akira <at> akirakyle.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 18:16:43 -0700

Some of these failing tests have been reported on guix-devel already:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-12/msg00158.html

On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:13 PM Akira Kyle <akira <at> akirakyle.com> wrote:
>
> Attached is the current log file for the test suite on commit 92faad0
> with the patch applied.

Message #35 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2022 20:39:42 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

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

> On the latest master I can run 'guix pull', and the latest guix seems
> to build just fine, however when I go to do 'guix system reconfigure',
> building guix fails the check phase.

Aiko has reported that the fix for 52908 did indeed fix the
"tests/guix-system.sh" problem on aarch64-linux.  This means the
"service 'xorg-server' provided more than once" error has been fixed.

However, fixing that issue has revealed another.  Aiko said:

> guix system reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the
> test 'file-needed/recursive' in tests/gremlin.scm failing.

So the current status is that Aiko still can't do "guix reconfigure" on
master after running "guix pull".  For this reason, I have re-opened
this bug and unmerged it from 52908, since it's not exactly the same
issue any more.

At the moment, the file-needed/recursive bug that is preventing Aiko
from running "guix reconfigure" appears to be specific to aarch64-linux.
The problem was reported on guix-devel here:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-01/msg00019.html

Pierre Langlois did some investigation and found this information,
posted in the email thread above:

> I've also been trying to fix this test but without much luck.  It
> does look similar to this issue for ppc64 [0], where the `ldd/ld.so'
> beaviour isn't the same as what the gremlin guile module does. However
> the patch proposed there isn't fixing the issue for me either on
> aarch64.
> 
> [0]: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/52940,
> 
> Maybe we can compare notes and a solution will come up :-).  So the test
> fails because 'truth', the result from `ldd', has ld-linux-aarch64.so
> listed while 'needed', from the gremlin guile module doesn't:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (truth ;; result from `ldd libguile.so'
>  ("/gnu/store/...-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1"   ;; This isn't
>                                                           ;; in gremlins
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libc.so.6"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libcrypt.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libdl.so.2"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libm.so.6"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libpthread.so.0"
>   "/gnu/store/...-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libffi-3.3/lib/libffi.so.7"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libgc-8.0.4/lib/libgc.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libunistring-0.9.10/lib/libunistring.so.2"))
> 
> (needed  ;; result from gremlin
>  ("/gnu/store/...-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libc.so.6"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libcrypt.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libdl.so.2"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libm.so.6"
>   "/gnu/store/...-glibc-2.33/lib/libpthread.so.0"
>   "/gnu/store/...-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libffi-3.3/lib/libffi.so.7"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libgc-8.0.4/lib/libgc.so.1"
>   "/gnu/store/...-libunistring-0.9.10/lib/libunistring.so.2"))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> Digging a bit more I started comparing x86_64 and aarch64 binaries and
> noticed that libguile.so didn't have the same dynamic section:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> # On aarch64:
> $ objdump -x 
> /gnu/store/pqw0c33k2h8n2snpchnyvx7w617kk31s-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1.4.0
>                         
>                                                                                 
>                                                         
> /gnu/store/pqw0c33k2h8n2snpchnyvx7w617kk31s-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1.4.0:
>      file format elf64-littleaarch64    
> ...
> Dynamic Section:                                                                
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libgc.so.1                                               
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libpthread.so.0                                          
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libffi.so.7                                              
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libunistring.so.2                                        
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libcrypt.so.1                                            
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libdl.so.2                                               
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libm.so.6                                                
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libgcc_s.so.1                                            
>                                                         
>   NEEDED               libc.so.6                                                
>                                                         
>   SONAME               libguile-3.0.so.1    
> ...
> 
> # On x86_64:
> $ objdump -x 
> /gnu/store/3h3jn0745ngd87zp83k5smwhykxvdfgf-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1.4.0
> 
> /gnu/store/3h3jn0745ngd87zp83k5smwhykxvdfgf-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1.4.0:
>      file format elf64-x86-64
> ...
> Dynamic Section:
>   NEEDED               libgc.so.1
>   NEEDED               libpthread.so.0
>   NEEDED               libffi.so.7
>   NEEDED               libunistring.so.2
>   NEEDED               libcrypt.so.1
>   NEEDED               libdl.so.2
>   NEEDED               libm.so.6
>   NEEDED               libgcc_s.so.1
>   NEEDED               libc.so.6
>   NEEDED               ld-linux-x86-64.so.2  # ld-linux-<arch>.so is here
>   SONAME               libguile-3.0.so.1
> ...
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> On aarch64, ld-linux-<arch> is missing.  I'm not sure if this is an
> issue with our aarch64 port or if that's OK. It's interesting though
> that if you run `ldd' on libguile on aarch64, the dynamic linker is
> added to the list, even though it's not in the dynamic section:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> # On aarch64
> $ ldd 
> /gnu/store/pqw0c33k2h8n2snpchnyvx7w617kk31s-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1.4.0
>         linux-vdso.so.1 (0x0000ffff96fab000)
>         libgc.so.1 => 
> /gnu/store/1gkpbfxjx2sbchjhf19yjm4a8vkir0nm-libgc-8.0.4/lib/libgc.so.1 
> (0x0000ffff96d88000)
>         libpthread.so.0 => 
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/libpthread.so.0 
> (0x0000ffff96d59000)
>         libffi.so.7 => 
> /gnu/store/hjirgm7pwmc2biqz6d0fc1ajr3ha4v14-libffi-3.3/lib/libffi.so.7 
> (0x0000ffff96d40000)
>         libunistring.so.2 => 
> /gnu/store/4k552fq1p6q73mr9ww7g5y3m77p7cfbm-libunistring-0.9.10/lib/libunistring.so.2
>  (0x0000ffff96bb4000)
>         libcrypt.so.1 => 
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/libcrypt.so.1 
> (0x0000ffff96b6d000)
>         libdl.so.2 => 
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/libdl.so.2 
> (0x0000ffff96b59000)
>         libm.so.6 => 
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/libm.so.6 
> (0x0000ffff96ab0000)
>         libgcc_s.so.1 => 
> /gnu/store/47snyrq6pq6896m9dysp2s5vx53m6x08-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 
> (0x0000ffff96a8b000)
>         libc.so.6 => 
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/libc.so.6 
> (0x0000ffff96917000)
>         
> /gnu/store/skfhr2f8b7jnnpiarrrcjn6qx0xzfw00-glibc-2.33/lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1
>  (0x0000ffff96f79000)
>         # ^
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> We could adapt the test to add the dynamic linker, emulating `ldd', but
> I'm curious if anybody deeply familiar with ELF and dynamic linking
> might have an idea what's going on.

To summarize, this seems to be the problem: On aarch64-linux, when an
ELF file's dynamic section does not contain a NEEDED entry for
ld-linux-aarch64.so.1, file-needed/recursive dutifully omits that entry,
but ldd prints it (even though it is actually missing from the file's
dynamic section).  This causes the file-needed/recursive test in
tests/gremlin.scm to fail because the set of entries returned by
file-needed/recursive differs from the set of entries returned by ldd.

Although this may sound similar to 52940, it is different.  Bug 52940
was an issue where, when an ELF file's dynamic section contains two
entries in RUNPATH that are different strings but refer to the same
directory (which does happen on powerpc64le-linux), it causes
file-needed/recursive to include in its result two entries that are
different strings but refer to the same file.  We decided that such
redundant entries are probably benign, so we resolved 52940 by changing
the test to compare entries by file equality, rather than string
equality.  However, this is not the same issue as described by Aiko and
Pierre above, so it makes sense that the fix for 52940 did not fix the
test for aarch64-linux.

So, the separate aarch64-linux problem with file-needed/recursive
persists.  For comparison, on powerpc64le-linux, when an ELF file's
dynamic section does not contain a NEEDED entry for "ld64.so.2" (I
believe this is the powerpc64le-linux equivalent of
ld-linux-aarch64.so.1), both ldd and file-needed/recursive include
ld64.so.2, despite the fact that there is no actual NEEDED entry for it
in the ELF file.  Here is what I see on a powerpc64le-linux system:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ type -P guile
/gnu/store/qr79b2m6cfdj8ar7g0psqg4hglm6djfm-profile/bin/guile
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ type -P ldd
/gnu/store/qr79b2m6cfdj8ar7g0psqg4hglm6djfm-profile/bin/ldd
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ ldd /gnu/store/qr79b2m6cfdj8ar7g0psqg4hglm6djfm-profile/bin/guile
        linux-vdso64.so.1 (0x00007fff89220000)
        libguile-3.0.so.1 => /gnu/store/47s31zvkhk2ixqn0z7gq6hpz7j7cn9dl-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1 (0x00007fff89050000)
        libgc.so.1 => /gnu/store/csqz3w2axyci2qm79xsj11cpfxqh7zb1-libgc-8.0.4/lib/libgc.so.1 (0x00007fff88fb0000)
        libpthread.so.0 => /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007fff88f60000)
        libffi.so.7 => /gnu/store/kmgva3hbpk1bv0gvx5s4w01n0fdvd2l9-libffi-3.3/lib/../lib/libffi.so.7 (0x00007fff88f30000)
        libunistring.so.2 => /gnu/store/zf87w2xccli6yvxpplfwd82gcgm6jyrd-libunistring-0.9.10/lib/libunistring.so.2 (0x00007fff88d80000)
        libcrypt.so.1 => /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x00007fff88d30000)
        libdl.so.2 => /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00007fff88d00000)
        libm.so.6 => /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007fff88bb0000)
        libgcc_s.so.1 => /gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fff88b70000)
        libc.so.6 => /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007fff88950000)
        /gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/ld64.so.2 (0x00007fff89240000)
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ readelf -d /gnu/store/qr79b2m6cfdj8ar7g0psqg4hglm6djfm-profile/bin/guile

Dynamic section at offset 0xfc60 contains 37 entries:
  Tag        Type                         Name/Value
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libguile-3.0.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libgc.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libffi.so.7]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libunistring.so.2]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libcrypt.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libdl.so.2]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libm.so.6]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libc.so.6]
 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH)            Library runpath: [/gnu/store/47s31zvkhk2ixqn0z7gq6hpz7j7cn9dl-guile-3.0.7/lib:/gnu/store/csqz3w2axyci2qm79xsj11cpfxqh7zb1-libgc-8.0.4/lib:/gnu/store/kmgva3hbpk1bv0gvx5s4w01n0fdvd2l9-libffi-3.3/lib/../lib:/gnu/store/zf87w2xccli6yvxpplfwd82gcgm6jyrd-libunistring-0.9.10/lib:/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib:/gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/../lib:/gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/gcc/powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu/10.3.0/../../../../lib]
 0x000000000000000c (INIT)               0x100009e0
 0x000000000000000d (FINI)               0x10000f30
 0x0000000000000019 (INIT_ARRAY)         0x1001fc50
 0x000000000000001b (INIT_ARRAYSZ)       8 (bytes)
 0x000000000000001a (FINI_ARRAY)         0x1001fc58
 0x000000000000001c (FINI_ARRAYSZ)       8 (bytes)
 0x0000000000000004 (HASH)               0x100002a0
 0x000000006ffffef5 (GNU_HASH)           0x100002f8
 0x0000000000000005 (STRTAB)             0x100004a8
 0x0000000000000006 (SYMTAB)             0x10000328
 0x000000000000000a (STRSZ)              894 (bytes)
 0x000000000000000b (SYMENT)             24 (bytes)
 0x0000000000000015 (DEBUG)              0x0
 0x0000000000000003 (PLTGOT)             0x10020000
 0x0000000000000002 (PLTRELSZ)           216 (bytes)
 0x0000000000000014 (PLTREL)             RELA
 0x0000000000000017 (JMPREL)             0x100008e8
 0x0000000070000000 (PPC64_GLINK)        0x10000eec
 0x0000000070000003 (PPC64_OPT)          0x0
 0x0000000000000007 (RELA)               0x10000888
 0x0000000000000008 (RELASZ)             96 (bytes)
 0x0000000000000009 (RELAENT)            24 (bytes)
 0x000000006ffffffe (VERNEED)            0x10000848
 0x000000006fffffff (VERNEEDNUM)         2
 0x000000006ffffff0 (VERSYM)             0x10000826
 0x0000000000000000 (NULL)               0x0
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ ./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 (guix build gremlin)
scheme@(guix-user)> ,pp (file-needed/recursive "/gnu/store/qr79b2m6cfdj8ar7g0psqg4hglm6djfm-profile/bin/guile")
$1 = ("/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libc.so.6"
 "/gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libm.so.6"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libdl.so.2"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libcrypt.so.1"
 "/gnu/store/zf87w2xccli6yvxpplfwd82gcgm6jyrd-libunistring-0.9.10/lib/libunistring.so.2"
 "/gnu/store/kmgva3hbpk1bv0gvx5s4w01n0fdvd2l9-libffi-3.3/lib/../lib/libffi.so.7"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/libpthread.so.0"
 "/gnu/store/csqz3w2axyci2qm79xsj11cpfxqh7zb1-libgc-8.0.4/lib/libgc.so.1"
 "/gnu/store/47s31zvkhk2ixqn0z7gq6hpz7j7cn9dl-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/ld64.so.2"
 "/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/../lib/libc.so.6")
$2 = ("ld64.so.2")
scheme@(guix-user)>
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I don't know if it's related, but I just noticed this: it's a little
strange that in the above output (for powerpc64le-linux), ld64.so.2 is
included in the second value ($2).  This is supposedly the list of .so
file names that could not be found.  It's strange that ld64.so.2 shows
up in $2 because it seems to contradict the fact that it is included in
$1, which is the list of files that were found successfully.

Since Pierre shared information about the libguile shared object
specifically, I'll do the same here.  On powerpc64le-linux, the
"ld64.so.2" entry is present in the dynamic section of the
/gnu/store/47s31zvkhk2ixqn0z7gq6hpz7j7cn9dl-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1
ELF file:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
marusich <at> suzaku ~/guix-master [env]$ readelf -d /gnu/store/47s31zvkhk2ixqn0z7gq6hpz7j7cn9dl-guile-3.0.7/lib/libguile-3.0.so.1| grep -e NEEDED -e RUNPATH
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libgc.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libffi.so.7]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libunistring.so.2]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libcrypt.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libdl.so.2]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libm.so.6]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libgcc_s.so.1]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libc.so.6]
 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [ld64.so.2]
 0x000000000000001d (RUNPATH)            Library runpath: [/gnu/store/csqz3w2axyci2qm79xsj11cpfxqh7zb1-libgc-8.0.4/lib:/gnu/store/kmgva3hbpk1bv0gvx5s4w01n0fdvd2l9-libffi-3.3/lib/../lib:/gnu/store/zf87w2xccli6yvxpplfwd82gcgm6jyrd-libunistr
ing-0.9.10/lib:/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib:/gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/3jr84ajdz821y480c454pqrswxbhgzlq-glibc-2.33/lib/../lib:/gnu/store/l0hnwrv8ma03shjg84a03s05
wmj7a0sk-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/gcc/powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu/10.3.0/../../../../lib]
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Maybe this information can help somehow.

It seems fishy that on aarch64-linux, there is no NEEDED entry for
ld-linux-aarch64.so.1 in the ELF files under consideration.  As shown
above, a similar entry DOES exist on both x86_64-linux and
powerpc64le-linux.  For this reason, it seems plausible that maybe the
missing NEEDED entry is bad.  However, I don't really know enough to say
whether it's indicative of a problem with our aarch64-linux port.  Is
there an aarch64-linux or ELF expert in the room who can help?  :-)

It also seems fishy that, on powerpc64le-linux, file-needed/recursive
apparently resolves ld64.so.2 successfully, even though it
simultaneously includes it in the "failed to resolve" list.  Confusing
as that is to me, I don't know if that's really related to the
aarch64-linux issue.

More investigation is needed...

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836

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

Message #38 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>, bug-guix <at> gnu.org, 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 13:27:51 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Chris,

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

(snip)

> It seems fishy that on aarch64-linux, there is no NEEDED entry for
> ld-linux-aarch64.so.1 in the ELF files under consideration.  As shown
> above, a similar entry DOES exist on both x86_64-linux and
> powerpc64le-linux.  For this reason, it seems plausible that maybe the
> missing NEEDED entry is bad.  However, I don't really know enough to say
> whether it's indicative of a problem with our aarch64-linux port.  Is
> there an aarch64-linux or ELF expert in the room who can help?  :-)
>
> It also seems fishy that, on powerpc64le-linux, file-needed/recursive
> apparently resolves ld64.so.2 successfully, even though it
> simultaneously includes it in the "failed to resolve" list.  Confusing
> as that is to me, I don't know if that's really related to the
> aarch64-linux issue.
>
> More investigation is needed...

I'm afraid I don't have any new insight if this is an issue or just
working as intended. Given we have a limited bandwidth to address this
thoroughly, would it make sense to apply a temporary work-around in the
mean time? I'd be good for at least guix to build on aarch64 in the 1.4
release.

I have the attached patch in my tree for instance (along with an update
of the guix package), and I've not noticed any issues on a rockpro64,
running cgit, DHCP and dnsmasq. That's just anecdotal :-), but I'm also
thinking if we unblock the guix package then the farm might catch other
issues that could help getting to the bottom of this.

WDYT?

Thanks,
Pierre

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

[0001-gremlin-Adjust-test-for-aarch64.patch (text/x-patch, inline)]

From cdd2c995b7c03400a9702a6b354655b0584b727c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:02:08 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] gremlin: Adjust test for aarch64.

---
 tests/gremlin.scm | 11 +++++++++--
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/gremlin.scm b/tests/gremlin.scm
index 9e0017337a..c9b05ae21a 100644
--- a/tests/gremlin.scm
+++ b/tests/gremlin.scm
@@ -20,9 +20,11 @@
 (define-module (test-gremlin)
   #:use-module (guix elf)
   #:use-module (guix tests)
-  #:use-module ((guix utils) #:select (call-with-temporary-directory))
+  #:use-module ((guix utils) #:select (call-with-temporary-directory
+                                       target-aarch64?))
   #:use-module (guix build utils)
   #:use-module (guix build gremlin)
+  #:use-module (gnu packages bootstrap)
   #:use-module (srfi srfi-1)
   #:use-module (srfi srfi-26)
   #:use-module (srfi srfi-34)
@@ -99,7 +101,12 @@ (define ground-truth
                 (or (string-prefix? "linux-vdso.so" entry)
                     (string-prefix? "linux-vdso32.so" entry) ;32-bit powerpc
                     (string-prefix? "linux-vdso64.so" entry) ;64-bit powerpc
-                    (string-prefix? "linux-gate.so" entry))) ;i386
+                    (string-prefix? "linux-gate.so" entry)   ;i386
+                    ;; FIXME: Binaries on aarch64 do not always include the
+                    ;; dynamic linker in their NEEDED section, it's unclear if that's OK, see
+                    ;; ttps://bugs.gnu.org/52943.
+                    (and (target-aarch64?)
+                         (string-contains entry (glibc-dynamic-linker)))))
               (read-ldd-output pipe)))

     (and (zero? (close-pipe pipe))
--
2.34.0

Message #44 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 17:00:33 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Pierre,

FYI, it looks like you included bug-guix <at> gnu.org in the CC list of your
last email.  If you do that, I believe it will create a new bug report,
which may not be what you intended to do.

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

> I'm afraid I don't have any new insight if this is an issue or just
> working as intended. Given we have a limited bandwidth to address this
> thoroughly, would it make sense to apply a temporary work-around in the
> mean time? I'd be good for at least guix to build on aarch64 in the 1.4
> release.
>
> I have the attached patch in my tree for instance (along with an update
> of the guix package), and I've not noticed any issues on a rockpro64,
> running cgit, DHCP and dnsmasq. That's just anecdotal :-), but I'm also
> thinking if we unblock the guix package then the farm might catch other
> issues that could help getting to the bottom of this.
>
> WDYT?

I agree with you.  That said, I don't personally run any aarch64-linux
machines, and I don't plan to investigate the aarch64-linux issue
further right now.

Although I will defer to anyone who actually runs aarch64-linux and
knows better, at the moment to me it seems reasonable to commit a patch
like the one you've proposed in order to ensure that the "guix" package
builds successfully on that platform for the 1.4.0 release.  The fact
that you have successfully built and used various pieces of software on
aarch64-linux with this patch suggests that maybe the current behavior
is OK, after all.

I've made some rather trivial modifications to your patch, mainly to
make it conform to our required ChangeLog format.  If nobody has further
comments, I will commit the attached version to master in about 24
hours.

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836

[0001-tests-Fix-file-needed-recursive-on-aarch64-linux.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

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

Message #49 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 20:46:22 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

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

> If nobody has further comments, I will commit the attached version to
> master in about 24 hours.

I've committed this in 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab.  We
still need to update the "guix" package, so even if you run "guix pull"
right now, you won't be able to successfully build "guix" after pulling
on aarch64-linux yet.

I will coordinate with the other people who are helping to make the
1.4.0 release to ensure that this fix makes it into the 1.4.0 release.
See this guix-devel email thread for details:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-01/msg00296.html

-- 
Chris

PGP: https://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=106836

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

Message #52 received at 52943 <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>, Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>,
 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 18:51:34 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

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

> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> Hi,
>
> Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> If nobody has further comments, I will commit the attached version to
>> master in about 24 hours.
>
> I've committed this in 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab.  We
> still need to update the "guix" package, so even if you run "guix pull"
> right now, you won't be able to successfully build "guix" after pulling
> on aarch64-linux yet.
>
> I will coordinate with the other people who are helping to make the
> 1.4.0 release to ensure that this fix makes it into the 1.4.0 release.
> See this guix-devel email thread for details:
>
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-01/msg00296.html

That's awesome, thank you!

Pierre

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

Message #55 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>, Chris Marusich
 <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 21:33:01 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2022-01-17, Pierre Langlois wrote:
> Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:

>>> If nobody has further comments, I will commit the attached version to
>>> master in about 24 hours.
>>
>> I've committed this in 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab.  We
>> still need to update the "guix" package, so even if you run "guix pull"
>> right now, you won't be able to successfully build "guix" after pulling
>> on aarch64-linux yet.
>>
>> I will coordinate with the other people who are helping to make the
>> 1.4.0 release to ensure that this fix makes it into the 1.4.0 release.
>> See this guix-devel email thread for details:
>>
>>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-01/msg00296.html
>
> That's awesome, thank you!

FWIW, I can also confirm that updating the "guix" package to a version
that contains 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab allows the "guix"
package (which contains the fairly important "guix-daemon"), to build
again. Thanks for getting it that far!

Haven't been able to upgrade my aarch64 systems without local patches
for over a month now... glad to see a fix is *almost* ready!

Is there anything in particular holding back upating the guix package
(other than the huge amount of big merges in progress, release
preparation, etc. and etc.)?


Thanks everyone!


live well,
  vagrant

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

Message #60 received at 52943-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>, Chris Marusich
 <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Aiko Kyle <aikokyle <at> gmail.com>, 52943-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:28:28 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2022-01-17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2022-01-17, Pierre Langlois wrote:
>> Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>> Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>>>> If nobody has further comments, I will commit the attached version to
>>>> master in about 24 hours.
>>>
>>> I've committed this in 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab.  We
>>> still need to update the "guix" package, so even if you run "guix pull"
>>> right now, you won't be able to successfully build "guix" after pulling
>>> on aarch64-linux yet.
>>>
>>> I will coordinate with the other people who are helping to make the
>>> 1.4.0 release to ensure that this fix makes it into the 1.4.0 release.
>>> See this guix-devel email thread for details:
>>>
>>>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-01/msg00296.html
>>
>> That's awesome, thank you!
>
> FWIW, I can also confirm that updating the "guix" package to a version
> that contains 24c3485bb3ffc05e687ef6513ac287b8d3048bab allows the "guix"
> package (which contains the fairly important "guix-daemon"), to build
> again. Thanks for getting it that far!
>
> Haven't been able to upgrade my aarch64 systems without local patches
> for over a month now... glad to see a fix is *almost* ready!
>
> Is there anything in particular holding back upating the guix package
> (other than the huge amount of big merges in progress, release
> preparation, etc. and etc.)?

I went ahead and pushed to master:

  f758ede583ef9662963873750206540f58ff3c45 gnu: guix: update to 1.3.0-22.24c3485.

I tried building a newer version, but there were new test suite failures
on both aarch64 and x86_64 :/

Happy aarch64ing!

live well,
  vagrant

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

Message #65 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 13:33:27 -0500

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:28:28AM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> I tried building a newer version, but there were new test suite failures
> on both aarch64 and x86_64 :/

Since the 'guix' package still does not build on aarch64, I'm reopening
this bug.

Message #70 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com, bug-guix <at> gnu.org,
 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:54:24 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Leo,

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

> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:28:28AM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> I tried building a newer version, but there were new test suite failures
>> on both aarch64 and x86_64 :/
>
> Since the 'guix' package still does not build on aarch64, I'm reopening
> this bug.

Oh it doesn't? What hash are you on?

I'm currently on b14a1cdef571c0901f716f4e752a97e8028ccbbd on a RockPro64
and it's working OK, maybe something changed since then although this
hash isn't very old. I see the farm does not have any substitutes yet.

Thanks,
Pierre

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

Message #76 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
Cc: vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com, bug-guix <at> gnu.org,
 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 16:06:26 -0500

On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 08:54:24PM +0000, Pierre Langlois wrote:
> > Since the 'guix' package still does not build on aarch64, I'm reopening
> > this bug.
> 
> Oh it doesn't? What hash are you on?

I'm not using aarch64, so I can't give a commit hash. I am observing the
build farm's support for aarch64.

> I'm currently on b14a1cdef571c0901f716f4e752a97e8028ccbbd on a RockPro64
> and it's working OK, maybe something changed since then although this
> hash isn't very old. I see the farm does not have any substitutes yet.

As you point out, the build farm cannot build it:

https://ci.guix.gnu.org/search?query=spec%3Amaster+system%3Aaarch64-linux+guix-1.3.0

Maybe it's a problem with in the 'guix' package, maybe in the some other
package. But the effect for users is the same, and they report things
like this:

https://issues.guix.gnu.org/53616

Message #82 received at 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com,
 Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>, bug-guix <at> gnu.org,
 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 21:35:27 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

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

> On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 08:54:24PM +0000, Pierre Langlois wrote:
>> > Since the 'guix' package still does not build on aarch64, I'm reopening
>> > this bug.
>> 
>> Oh it doesn't? What hash are you on?
>
> I'm not using aarch64, so I can't give a commit hash. I am observing the
> build farm's support for aarch64.
>
>> I'm currently on b14a1cdef571c0901f716f4e752a97e8028ccbbd on a RockPro64
>> and it's working OK, maybe something changed since then although this
>> hash isn't very old. I see the farm does not have any substitutes yet.
>
> As you point out, the build farm cannot build it:
>
> https://ci.guix.gnu.org/search?query=spec%3Amaster+system%3Aaarch64-linux+guix-1.3.0
>
> Maybe it's a problem with in the 'guix' package, maybe in the some other
> package. But the effect for users is the same, and they report things
> like this:
>
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/53616

Oh I see, I'm not familiar with how the infra works, but it looks like
aarch64 jobs aren't currently scheduled at all: https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/337714/details

Maybe we could restart it and see if we can reproduce the problem? I
wonder if there's a good reason for jobs not being scheduled, I saw
recent commits regarding new aarch64 HW being set up.

I'll be happy to help debug build issues when we know more of course!

Thanks,
Pierre

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

Message #90 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com, bug-guix <at> gnu.org,
 52943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 09:48:47 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

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

> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:28:28AM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> I tried building a newer version, but there were new test suite failures
>> on both aarch64 and x86_64 :/
>
> Since the 'guix' package still does not build on aarch64, I'm reopening
> this bug.

It looks to me that there were problems with the guix package on
aarch64-linux, but it's working currently.

1: https://data.guix.gnu.org/repository/1/branch/master/package/guix/output-history?output=out&system=aarch64-linux&target=none

Also, substitute availability for aarch64-linux and armhf-linux is
OK. Does that mean this issue can be closed?

Thanks,

Chris

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

Message #98 received at 52943-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
To: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
Cc: vagrant <at> debian.org, aikokyle <at> gmail.com, 52943-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#52943: Cannot build guix as part of guix system reconfigure
 after commit 224d437fb4 on aarch64
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:57:36 +0200

Hello,

> Also, substitute availability for aarch64-linux and armhf-linux is
> OK. Does that mean this issue can be closed?

The guix package for armhf-linux is not built anymore by
ci.guix.gnu.org, but guix for aarch64-linux seems to be working.

Closing,

Thanks,

Mathieu

Previous Next

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