GNU bug report logs - #63331
Guile-GnuTLS/Git circular dependency

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon <at> josefsson.org>, Vivien Kraus <vivien <at> planete-kraus.eu>, 63331 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#63331: Guile-GnuTLS/Git circular dependency
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 16:59:28 +0100

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

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

> Hi,
>
> Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net> skribis:
>
>> It seems to build for me, but I'm having problems cross building. There
>> were warnings before about protocol/ssl3 being undefined, but now this
>> seems to result in an error when building extra.scm:
>>
>>
>>   GUILEC   modules/gnutls.go
>> gnutls.scm:608:23: warning: possibly unbound variable `protocol/ssl3'
>> gnutls.scm:609:25: warning: possibly unbound variable `protocol/tls1-0'
>> gnutls.scm:610:25: warning: possibly unbound variable `protocol/tls1-1'
>>   GUILEC   modules/gnutls/extra.go
>
> [...]
>
>> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception:
>> Unbound variable: protocol/ssl3
>> make[3]: *** [Makefile:1295: modules/gnutls/extra.go] Error 1
>
> Is it a regression or did we already have that problem?

A regression I think, the data service doesn't have recent data, but it
does know about builds that worked:

  https://data.guix.gnu.org/repository/1/branch/master/package/guile-gnutls/output-history?output=out&system=x86_64-linux&target=riscv64-linux-gnu

> That comes from this bit in (gnutls):
>
>   ;; Renaming.
>   (define protocol/ssl-3 protocol/ssl3)
>   (define protocol/tls-1.0 protocol/tls1-0)
>   (define protocol/tls-1.1 protocol/tls1-1)
>
> When cross-compiling, the .so cannot be loaded (understandably; see also
> GNUTLS_GUILE_CROSS_COMPILING) so ‘protocol/ssl3’ above is undefined.
> The problem is that when compiling (gnutls extra), we end up loading
> (gnutls) and thus evaluating the lines above, which fail.
>
> In Guile-Avahi I worked around it like so:
>
>   (define protocol/unspecified
>     (and (defined? 'protocol/unspec) protocol/unspec))
>
> I guess we could do that as well

That sort of makes sense, although I don't know why this wasn't failing
in the same way in the past. Build logs are available though, so maybe
this makes sense to someone.

[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.