GNU bug report logs - #56353
sbcl-2.2.6 build fail

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#56353: closed (sbcl-2.2.6 build fail)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 10:13:02 +0000

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

Your message dated Sun, 03 Jul 2022 10:09:10 +0000
with message-id <87y1xapks4.fsf <at> kitej>
and subject line Re: bug#56353: sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #56353,
regarding sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
56353: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=56353
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Wensheng Xie <xiewensheng <at> hotmail.com>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2022 17:29:22 +0800

Hi, guix:

the command:
guix package -u

log:
/gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv wird erstellt …
- „build-doc“-Phasebuilder for `/gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv' failed with exit code 1
Erstellung von /gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv fehlgeschlagen
Das Erstellungsprotokoll kann unter „/var/log/guix/drvs/6l/q7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv.bz2“ eingesehen werden.
guix package: Fehler: build of
`/gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv' failed

This is what I had right. If you need more, please let me know.

best regards
wxie

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: 56353-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>,
 bokr <at> bokr.com
Subject: Re: bug#56353: sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 10:09:10 +0000

[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]

Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net> skribis:

> bokr <at> bokr.com skribis:
>
>> I wonder what running this at the time builds failed would have shown:
>>
>> #/usr/bin/bash
>> # ~/bin/top-1-sans-hilights -- single snap of top without highlight escapes (no top opt for that??)
>> top -n 1 | \
>> sed -e 's:[\r][^\r]*[\r]\+::g' -e 's:[\x07\r]::g' -e 's:.\x08::g' \
>>     -e 's:\x1B\[[^a-zA-Z]*[a-zA-Z]\x0f*::g' \
>>     -e 's:\xe2\x80\x98:":g' -e 's:\xe2\x80\x99:":g'
>>
>> (no guarantees on my hack to get rid of the highlighting escapes
>> and utf8->ascii quote subst :)
>> (top seems to assume even -n 1 output is always going to interactive dest)
>>
>> Anyway, wondering: Could memory and CPU loading at the time
>> have triggered the build failure?
>
> I don't think so. It looks like the SB-SIMD optional module only gets
> built on x86_64 CPUs supporting AVX2 instructions. The Bayfront and
> Harbourfront machines don't, and this is why the 'build-doc' phase fails
> when trying to load SB-SIMD to compile its documentation.
>
> I'm testing a patch disabling SB-SIMD, and I'll push it if all goes
> well.

Patch pushed as e0d2f8164e6a1c15fdcae6f7dadb05c0c9e25352.
Closing.

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

Previous Next

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