From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 30 14:07:05 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 18:07:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36460 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6D61-0002y8-Az for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:07:05 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:58166) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6D5y-0002y1-Pc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:07:03 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t6D5y-0001L6-Jc for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:07:02 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t6D5w-00083W-MM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:07:02 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730311617; x=1730916417; i=jakob.kirsch@web.de; bh=jpvUw832ZA0Tp9v8R4a6YAuaOhuLI081hFrE5qu3M6o=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from: message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=a5YQal342vIM4gIN9/a4bKsY0wcP440ygTzrJoMBfoOAH16qW+jrP+yNeIT6nZho kCg8mX5W2Y2Fyd5zc7jmUVnuBULWN9QjZswK2y3+Sis4j0n8AmHvzShKh52B9dKkQ GYKSytnoL33MMjwailXvKfvGf2i03dbqEDQN9c2JMZKuHjmiZhsIxBDlwhNKdy1Ee JlzWk+zhFq7qiJUtogCHpfnlsG+Kh4Sd2GA89OxARn2gCzuwDe6JnmJvvdNbmWOPy MuGGju0YcZnVp/xinnPzXoaC1Aub6d5v3A/WVg3/bYG2CpVIYok9tke3vRf7MOiM0 ynMSMyNp4DUtzHAmSA== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from kernelpanicroom ([134.19.29.168]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MI3tF-1t2a4k0COt-000dUC for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:06:57 +0100 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:06:57 +0100 From: Jakob Kirsch To: guix-patches@gnu.org Subject: [PATCH] Fix determinism issue in guix package Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="qKzgm8cl8F6463sy" Content-Disposition: inline X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Xc5OPgKKkN7bmTkPhXfjXKiVcCIvsRIMIvMsyJq1Pf7kfW7Z4Zi 7exXz6PjBxPue8JoM/gB6CWN7Ec8fyCAMd1QoaO1AJiq6RFVTZ3Q8i5I30XWs/3PBlHjS4O ysFKFriSGdfseSBpZxhexxQa5Oq4bjmn6Sha3IyE5R1zkTdgINc21J/sWfWXIsDGZsvkZho WDweMrIY4W95rDXxjbiWA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:4BekegwE4do=;c0Dsr4SHjVdliJLTY/ToG7ftWQj Eapi+CDcN2XiYOdMSIzIbfA25DbCatyVS8NAMjs/iJZXTeKw/GbHsPfbKqtWODV1C+SWbIFwo tS1SYSdz659DttXNEwUfFy0vOhk/6prZMkxuHYuY27EEwIU+Yb90xGlEvX8K2rVjaK7KOEDUK XGUxsKVmZWJynHOLZvEILFVhXrEM0PpCMxy4YIsoxqna2sKeD43Q6+DpGQFe2Z5bBWbK6Fqz2 gGCqHn3cfwEAON5hFlssWPxlWp4bTHjqoBqMlQg6ePDyCW9MjqANbRl2Pm46eW7l44uzSfyou J4/XcO8PKuk947nI+kGewOyfNdVo/9dZn64QxCdp82Y/x2lYDdt9QJpw23JP9NentobaloLgt cxwQt17Xj/mb01l7Xi18n0oatEmrQx63nEz/zUHQQcuVQRvR8V67XKhqewfmDHGFoj/R51NmS I9/SpRaXlff/LF2c1TUXi4Fkx2qa114XIT8NcrdtaBqGtSN9cn8Aa53nMsgwqptnTw5cNt713 /q35Z1Grr0FthTJvB+cW2+J+la3WUtRAl8o3DDm4+kjwMVNOqHdczRMFmf4HlKahgskkyl/qE mDwkBxeJTVdLOUVGOK7IVwDS0ZMQNLI6oKgVwDoPzb7lWwQWMvzfQIdmCq6Dc9yl8j37EiGz2 rGu7RGL0T59x1nRCFOaGqWr+YSgFmTomwx8GWN7fTjgK0vQM3bjiwU7fb2b96ZSEqXIZvMo6t HSy1hbJvI4wup5Gz8A4OLwGibniayYtTTtaUIiPXi+ksEAegQmwpri8RbK4wrGrkzaVWUkuOh WGQyXh6/WAigpljoP9L/+b5g== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.72.192.78; envelope-from=jakob.kirsch@web.de; helo=mout.web.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) --qKzgm8cl8F6463sy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline I've recently noticed that `guix challenge guix` returns different hashes for each substitute server and also every build with `guix build --no-grafts guix` fails. Running `guix build --no-grafts guix --cores=1` seems to reliably produce the same hash though. As someone pointed out on XMPP, Guile seems to have issues with parallel builds so this patch disables them for the guix package. I think this has high importance because the main guix package should be reproducible in order to trust the whole chain of packages. --qKzgm8cl8F6463sy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="v1-0001-gnu-guix-Fix-determinism-issue.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =46rom 0f3df56dd0c430c09ba2839c9e2d5b32948201ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 Message-ID: <0f3df56dd0c430c09ba2839c9e2d5b32948201ae.1730311414.git.jakob= .kirsch@web.de> From: Jakob Kirsch Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:02:15 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v1] gnu: guix: Fix determinism issue * gnu/packages/package-management.scm (guix): Fix determinism issue by dis= abling parallel build. Change-Id: Ie28e16ed1f15cbc0da0c0d70b2c461e2baa3ff0a =2D-- gnu/packages/package-management.scm | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/package-management.scm b/gnu/packages/package-ma= nagement.scm index 1763d2d59f..478a74385b 100644 =2D-- a/gnu/packages/package-management.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/package-management.scm @@ -199,7 +199,8 @@ (define-public guix (file-name (string-append "guix-" version "-checkout")))) (build-system gnu-build-system) (arguments - `(#:configure-flags (list + `(#:parallel-build? #false ; for reproducibility + #:configure-flags (list ;; Provide channel metadata for 'guix describ= e'. ;; Don't pass '--with-channel-url' and base-commit: d6f775c30c6f47e174f6110d1089edc6315600e4 =2D- 2.46.0 --qKzgm8cl8F6463sy-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 30 14:13:31 2024 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 18:13:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36502 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6DCE-0003Ad-T8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:13:31 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:53223) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6DCD-0003AQ-7h for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:13:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730312003; x=1730916803; i=jakob.kirsch@web.de; bh=sHuI7HUGJjfDyj8Czz13qJg5LmuSeNpk/QoOQcZjZCQ=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from: message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=oTgCSfGzbR66sHAkV50UPlnJNk+bFpjLC0AJ1OfvzAIV9zEF1okSI+62HTmxafF+ G19wcKvk4ro4l3Qnn9All9cNHYE2N6Ws3emJsJ0RfunLbz5rrVe3UjUuKsLwMyz/g whKOjggvFicVGGGyb0LsA/eP0eLM+5Wi2ST5MVg0kT02ZUAkWICvYRdMBtMqaEEyU Ff/zZ+nEv6Smod9FemEatJUUtY3/UjDFfifS6zA/KOr+AiNzqRSjsjOJWJDJlmaf/ abSgHHY6DoAlqasunWldlXsQvihSUoYecVuM9UfaJ8awJE+e4YRy3ntDAZyRpbllA 5pTSdDm9FWvx8WYXcg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from kernelpanicroom ([134.19.29.168]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MBjMM-1t0gMZ1oMO-004dOn for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:13:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:13:24 +0100 From: Jakob Kirsch To: control@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:6MHQT7bEnkoh+kYgdvMf1q73HR4B5HERLmocqCwtfpfq7+iYvEC tRefUUvTYx+cte0fwxw6towmjfQgEA0P+Ice1RefB6pNDtHvTMU7nZ6xrHBMvvuRNhyAMIf jFUMeEpZfH27x/T3fjiReGi1jhZ5LbhDAIj2xQ1fX8LZYnFI7OcqUWuab3aMIhxcU0ev1Sd gNH+yvoVDqf0cu0/beJkw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:AlDyfeNtUp4=;GhfxWPmprOIUhZEx/VCq0LidVlY +QhWPldiI1uwhizQseSntrfE8+KZyM4AvVmkzXrdBsQj4gpqjW6uusJPXp3BJHS+/6Z0jgTR2 O7XwyImtJBDQZRETo57Alk3KB3RCPvUi6mwFLS5AS3hXPBMSliYeksGW8TnMwf1wBvJ+OvCos wTZQY8QsLPn93wgeXDiFVuD0QOyr94qHDLBpScEVKcSuin0LsmAmoc4DmH4tyUXZfim7SVJYR HpqYVHYCd6Ij5lIh139+PcsoMNsqYt18Gj1bc9r3MG0oNP2BKJIcTmVrDa4ZPxBPyl7FpeppW JwUfEufZlRakcDNrkjegm/oymDuhC7tvOxk8NQKZ0Q7Kb3qCES+vdVI/2DJ9MOPiGKrNr90iB gI48B0eeA9O6iR98hYY8u0h4g3sCh4CaJXBnTYXyqBAXRyNF8jc/6hpm8aCTZrOBGsUpMG9go 1OE+cx5qR3Bh2Ry2tNLGFBDDVUzKrHhR3frMpNBTMJEg4p8HUBvBj2PyaHfrTBw04s8F4cbrQ tSUCuOAS60oBoetM/XDLD8GpmX48DCnhy2vRde1n9UaDLtHhko3KeQn5h3CIt53F20fz/tvwc 74E3DvMYeoVr9w97A4MNDkEdwPHxdWkl3nHY+iTHeTaGxAHh00Gq0oWfcnRo0PnudEjaV2lqh TvUAmCNXissAh4nJ5xTuPmVZkO+TClYHvKeVUwV58nrYSzJSi5UyZzFz4M9l/Udo5nUP0Lasq uYGG9UWHeCdzpLMgcuGs+WwYH5OgeHQj04A1xVi9Rv0bdPtId0nAsyjjgMi7SE+IOvRbWOIml v4j8MMH3OAXAG2bOxEXmcCJA== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: severity 74112 important quit Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.12 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (jakob.kirsch[at]web.de) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [212.227.17.12 listed in wl.mailspike.net] 0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. [212.227.17.12 listed in sa-trusted.bondedsender.org] 0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. [212.227.17.12 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com] 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header 0.2 NO_SUBJECT Extra score for no subject X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) severity 74112 important quit From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 05 05:31:51 2024 Received: (at 74112) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Nov 2024 10:31:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43554 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8Gql-0002PW-KF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 05:31:51 -0500 Received: from mail.boiledscript.com ([144.168.59.46]:42446) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8Gqj-0002PN-Ay; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 05:31:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:31:04 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ultrarare.space; s=dkim; t=1730802700; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=JbJ6nsnm1BP0KCxZgv/vGe6UX0Kf6zSc1INU4V9YnY0=; b=gV50K0WYMoZBduAaGOzDAgLjgyeYHLIMLYhwJzArs2NjiT/IJ5DppJL6vHNFa+T24s+Ee3 nn7n47Bel8hMolpD3zFHm5Ml+cGCUUtMw4HJk9/ZFO/nSuZOoPaUqAzJCUHOyHswzPgOWn OxHYMw8I9pfvhLg0adkNygS6fRlp2dQ65X3YIeLWTZCFIcO9lNOBrq0q6rU76C49g+7gC3 CH26X1J3Try5TMmgCbpll7NOlkkmuUBiyhAmQtSjlTxEH96rtwLHB+08+GUzQD+Wwyibim 4BfKJjEm9v4Xj4l1LyXYTdjyBDjfJfdUx9dea8XW4vXFg9E0JET54U4te2pScw== Authentication-Results: mail.boiledscript.com; auth=pass smtp.mailfrom=hako@ultrarare.space Message-ID: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> From: Hilton Chain To: Jakob Kirsch Subject: Re: bug#74204: Guix is not reproducible In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74112 Cc: 74112@debbugs.gnu.org, 74204@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Jakob, On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 02:38:34 +0800, Jakob Kirsch via Bug reports for GNU Guix wrote: > > I've recently noticed that `guix challenge guix` fails since guix isn't > reproducible at the moment. As someone pointed out on XMPP, this is due to > parallelism issues with Guile so running `guix build guix --no-grafts > --cores=1 --check` reliably produces the same output. > > I've sent a simple patch in #74112 to address this and I think this is > important since the main guix package should definitely be reproducible so it > can be trusted. I can confirm the reproducibility issue. I have two x86_64-linux machines building guix to verify the fix, I'll apply your patch once they produce matching outputs. Thanks for reporting! From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 05 10:25:43 2024 Received: (at 74112-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Nov 2024 15:25:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44178 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8LR9-0002by-H0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 10:25:43 -0500 Received: from mail.boiledscript.com ([144.168.59.46]:38756) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8LR7-0002bp-04; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 10:25:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 23:25:29 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ultrarare.space; s=dkim; t=1730820333; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=HTubToHMwvb84uvMQDuMvs8wDdtzDO0rm/oPHdbYV7c=; b=DwDDHkSGNMGsfwUGmzQHnWJDWoskJbVeDKSntrDe60KftxZmOMFll0L24UyfccmpI71vi1 E2q6YhsNigvMu+xw5Wacih1gwqgo/rPxgiY9X+TO7jQTVZZ6OrJk3Cne0d6upOW5doPmW8 yn8ahCrHeJq07m7pyI0j/9yeipW4Vfl8ru4dtccFvR8jnUJVDJkaLioA8JY5sF2LyVgDJy CJIm6obiMRvJkbPDGAx7pDtDG/VFXBVSqA0qj1PEKQm/ufql/V4++ZrnOEhuIVxFRV421m rVNeZXSI8tO+GqC+xjYpJJ4cPqf05bEyg/n01OqnY831LvH/EwjOth7Ej+bx6g== Authentication-Results: mail.boiledscript.com; auth=pass smtp.mailfrom=hako@ultrarare.space Message-ID: <87ed3pzora.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> From: Hilton Chain To: Jakob Kirsch Subject: Re: [bug#74112] bug#74204: Guix is not reproducible In-Reply-To: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> References: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74112-done Cc: 74112-done@debbugs.gnu.org, 74204-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello again, On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 18:31:04 +0800, Hilton Chain via Guix-patches via wrote: > > Hi Jakob, > > On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 02:38:34 +0800, > Jakob Kirsch via Bug reports for GNU Guix wrote: > > > > I've recently noticed that `guix challenge guix` fails since guix isn't > > reproducible at the moment. As someone pointed out on XMPP, this is due to > > parallelism issues with Guile so running `guix build guix --no-grafts > > --cores=1 --check` reliably produces the same output. > > > > I've sent a simple patch in #74112 to address this and I think this is > > important since the main guix package should definitely be reproducible so it > > can be trusted. > > I can confirm the reproducibility issue. > > I have two x86_64-linux machines building guix to verify the fix, I'll apply > your patch once they produce matching outputs. Took me quite a while to build 5 rounds. :) --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ guix hash --serializer=nar /gnu/store/fs7x07jfn7igpkwv3alrs9by21q70y13-guix-1.4.0-26.5ab3c4c 0kh87wb4qn97kwzrf4igal71cjvv143j6jr2y3dwfzcy1madj1ll --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Applied #74112 as 4c56d0cccdc44e12484b26332715f54768738c5f, thanks! From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 07 12:56:06 2024 Received: (at 74112-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Nov 2024 17:56:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49499 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t96jm-0003V5-5u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2024 12:56:06 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f48.google.com ([209.85.128.48]:57456) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t96jg-0003UB-S1; Thu, 07 Nov 2024 12:56:04 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f48.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4319399a411so11212755e9.2; Thu, 07 Nov 2024 09:56:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1731002095; x=1731606895; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=S1nFzSSdLUEBZk3sLAXeHZSb2N8KmGnJ6pwopbD0A5o=; b=NS6+hR//3DA0/TbK4ervQfmZO89kVPyh+h4+fccA+3+Gu1PwslFi4Ez48guc1ry6lU JLbrM4FeiZ45rNebC6DyMt8inSfE4aoyOohkotbzMqKht9nlyqMTmqQPtpM+kFvTJDWH dLfuM+h91uo/FZSj4asbGkvx9nypqyxqJ3VNRX1hTIC3BH4eOrl/Vkr6ID4iKcTvVdBD VGXs3ExzKg88XuVME+bzLhSWWxqnFQqUPkGY6a5K8kmNHmbTcA6R1lCVvQhtqneHSoUF cFyNp8AnTVaOqxO3zbRXDPOoh7qicz36qXrwRNJn3NXvtuliDiJPibtQ8XgXNJKnO25n zvAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1731002095; x=1731606895; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=S1nFzSSdLUEBZk3sLAXeHZSb2N8KmGnJ6pwopbD0A5o=; b=r5X08ZIR4hNDueNeXiGfBMgzWxLALq5UbjwPKo+Smsfhn3Fj7QTqVJjFP0X9/WSujG vTqM65x7Dy0lS5/AEHgq2tt0aVYoTVBSIpo+tCvsXHt4/UN4W4adl3DSUNB12JhK98nO 8Njz+bPWmOgfYEbx3YPBwU9/B1GrnDcr/+ks9LrcLhfB0zv8ac1KeEbP/i4UJV7Z67dG ucbl1LNjAmXQnlGyENWTLxlmU8NCvMFW3a+w6z2Y7XbiExODRxO0UZVSt7oReMUFY23U ojAbvBzaVov6F/NJdBs+aE7T42Z3Pv9aM+PqbipdA6ehnBNxkYECgeplpzr5ZbCv5bMd oqUQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXHuFa1aMemrCCtMhih4kH1ou59MlJ/VeKV8dl3owyr/P4zIUtcz8d87F0qmiOG1sArbR4OEu6vmCk30Q==@debbugs.gnu.org, AJvYcCXaqBBGc/TqGspvuHzKLgGMY4taaaA186PcI1Kv9HH3IBQ6YtWF4rc4AtAxNI4wKvsRSjKh3EbD752N@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzd7JGx4BZnoVqQpxPKi4y92QIoUearM57zqVOxzsJxu/OU5e2Z QiI7Rq4hjPKG1rGj+Ae++Rd7drGs7QYZ+V4XfcEcvOc0NZsFCA6xTJNqgw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGRhDhuhpOIvpeZPIKQuPFdE9WLHq4CLShjzuqyTghxBNcTVC/L8y6eoAb+botuIf8yIXOndg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1c01:b0:431:12a8:7f1a with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4319acadc13mr404157245e9.16.1731002095168; Thu, 07 Nov 2024 09:54:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-46.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-432aa6beea6sm70398065e9.20.2024.11.07.09.54.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 Nov 2024 09:54:54 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier To: Hilton Chain , Jakob Kirsch Subject: Re: bug#74204: [bug#74112] Guix is not reproducible In-Reply-To: <87ed3pzora.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> References: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> <87ed3pzora.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2024 18:54:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87pln70w16.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74112-done Cc: Guix Devel , 74112-done@debbugs.gnu.org, 74204-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 at 23:25, Hilton Chain via Bug reports for GNU Guix wrote: >> I can confirm the reproducibility issue. >> >> I have two x86_64-linux machines building guix to verify the fix, I'll a= pply >> your patch once they produce matching outputs. > > Took me quite a while to build 5 rounds. :) > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > $ guix hash --serializer=3Dnar /gnu/store/fs7x07jfn7igpkwv3alrs9by21q70y1= 3-guix-1.4.0-26.5ab3c4c > 0kh87wb4qn97kwzrf4igal71cjvv143j6jr2y3dwfzcy1madj1ll > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > Applied #74112 as 4c56d0cccdc44e12484b26332715f54768738c5f, thanks! Maybe I am missing something. To my knowledge, .go files produced by Guile are not always reproducible, see bug#20272 [1]. And, from my understanding, Guix cannot be reproducible until this bug had been fixed. Therefore, I am not convinced that this patch is worth under this frame considering the build-time penalty it brings. That=E2=80=99s said, maybe it=E2=80=99s better than nothing and the package= =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 is barely built after all. I do not know. What people think? Cheers, simon 1: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/20272 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Nov 10 04:12:56 2024 Received: (at 74112-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Nov 2024 09:12:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55552 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tA407-0006vp-St for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 04:12:56 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f178.google.com ([209.85.210.178]:48614) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tA402-0006vO-R1; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 04:12:51 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f178.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-720d5ada03cso3636772b3a.1; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 01:12:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1731229904; x=1731834704; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=kS530Somz06vhj6SOC1XhfeVs19SGhc3XuHvdz087lI=; b=Hfq5nd/OmH+Ic29TQdRTCCL+XkDZeZKSGMhbAbVzeOJcwEAt1Nbwlt/rkwDf0PQ+h5 BSjsn9FxygvPJLln49tTL2twXW/094XBfVEj893DzeNN5teBy5sstWENZQV00E+3w3b9 ihPij0KGVV9CAschFyHJRG2IeOJ4rqkXZ2o47aD3QSfGm4HNjD41oCPT1n4EoBKzDQLJ +JJtO3hUtnO42NK7JZJEuUYgRsxEDuac7y+AeyZ4JhDa9D8LoBM9ADba4HKDZWyqB2qn f7A8PESVy0JDKgirQWOc2HVbSICm5DHF3c+AOul2IsV4pNG5Jk429XQWlvAnTMtLxqPL ZlFw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1731229904; x=1731834704; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=kS530Somz06vhj6SOC1XhfeVs19SGhc3XuHvdz087lI=; b=FP/Xm2FGbo5NnvjlMB+4Brnm+wm0NA423/1IR5DB6caDKhXnVz/x2EGdNKgI90BXwR 0w2+JqgYpQJktcIhLgUr3lMgWbOkbbQ/SiXD1tVGqX0LT3fwRbRSFqPxMyeUtM68Khkl 2WDXk2kVvBBtGE2grKaysmZ652sv6THuYERH2iFYrzkQYo6QWAgmEWM4caXk6pz78vN0 +8ORUM/V5TYoPyfvYG+06XzeW9H1M+7UXxm5eyCYgVhkntBlNbwqyyWdYMEhXPEcLz3b gYWLchrAdoL9C2lghpktE8oObxMBKytl0xGY2E73SItHnyz56dfNdAZcL37/xmJe5FLI /oLA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWtmAW6f9WoTp5sgO0tTqwjMIZ0dblvBSb8ib3/mqihQjayAmpT49HpAjvzkKnPT4yL3WZq0p8kAgf9@debbugs.gnu.org, AJvYcCXH9Ssv7FwlTs/YU9+2D0rGnQBkIiVofSH0MyF/ooHldosX+nLpD9+BtIWO6cEKnTF4UF9zrJL7zyZTQg==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzlzhcnmMkcO2eLA/5gknKRXjbGUrCp2GTcnDidktcSeazoqVSf ajTycvbrZ//UDU6A9mWTZfiHKQ6dwOFhi+3Uw5Pf8NyB5eMfVtGPgaDD8Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFb3x/8kPtPKq/APeCVpMeXYsg1g/5w2dT187uT9ISWxxLqrl6l1+DHqoXOuflh445EogVeBw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:3a14:b0:71e:6a57:7290 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-72413133f3bmr13263095b3a.0.1731229904272; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 01:11:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from terra ([2405:6586:be0:0:c8ff:1707:9b9:af89]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-724078a7de1sm7001940b3a.62.2024.11.10.01.11.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 10 Nov 2024 01:11:43 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer To: Simon Tournier Subject: Re: bug#74204: [bug#74112] Guix is not reproducible In-Reply-To: <87pln70w16.fsf@gmail.com> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 07 Nov 2024 18:54:29 +0100") References: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> <87ed3pzora.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> <87pln70w16.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 18:11:38 +0900 Message-ID: <87a5e7xxkl.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74112-done Cc: Guix Devel , Hilton Chain , 74204-done@debbugs.gnu.org, 74112-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Jakob Kirsch X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Simon, Simon Tournier writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 at 23:25, Hilton Chain via Bug reports for GNU Guix <= bug-guix@gnu.org> wrote: > >>> I can confirm the reproducibility issue. >>> >>> I have two x86_64-linux machines building guix to verify the fix, I'll = apply >>> your patch once they produce matching outputs. >> >> Took me quite a while to build 5 rounds. :) >> >> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >> $ guix hash --serializer=3Dnar /gnu/store/fs7x07jfn7igpkwv3alrs9by21q70y= 13-guix-1.4.0-26.5ab3c4c >> 0kh87wb4qn97kwzrf4igal71cjvv143j6jr2y3dwfzcy1madj1ll >> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >> >> Applied #74112 as 4c56d0cccdc44e12484b26332715f54768738c5f, thanks! > > Maybe I am missing something. To my knowledge, .go files produced by > Guile are not always reproducible, see bug#20272 [1]. And, from my > understanding, Guix cannot be reproducible until this bug had been > fixed. Therefore, I am not convinced that this patch is worth under > this frame considering the build-time penalty it brings. > > That=E2=80=99s said, maybe it=E2=80=99s better than nothing and the packa= ge =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 is > barely built after all. I do not know. > > What people think? Perhaps we should set the default parallel-build? to #f in the guile-build-system at least in the meantime, with a prominent comment as to why and a reference to the upstream issue? Many Guile packages use the gnu-build-system so that wouldn't cover all of them like 'guix'... I'm not sure. It'd be nicer to fix the underlying guile issue (again?), but I doubt many people are up to this. --=20 Thanks, Maxim From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 14 05:01:48 2024 Received: (at 74112-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Nov 2024 10:01:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45123 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tBWfb-0005Vf-Sc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 05:01:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49232) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tBWfZ-0005VK-CJ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 05:01:46 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBWfS-0005S8-K5; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 05:01:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=SxhEt40z8W2zBOAx0q2IGOvorTYmUP4RzBvabF3TSUA=; b=myqnKGqsZTtzFkDDBzaN IN8VWyJ6C0vgFJMmK4twDmELluHSJPyNVBMAGJ1vd+is+6oW8AzUKxC5p6/4vGxRIcA4orz0YCEyX uh/hIbCfZLGNqVgjv1q0t7KfzFWp6QRTZyhafeEuibtJaQQorXl+lCpfo5chxuAJDpzjXIQORSp7e SZM31gGOhmH5/r7MpAUHXn81/quvL93zqGD2oNVhueW2kfb2fxOfTVV4CjsWicXfG0ZQqdzG2n1nW rQ+LA4MNGYfo7g8uP4Mn5YDvB24prppVVRrO1Ol2CZCCx3pI6ASkXhSuHu/N4CBaW6MWhr9NqwqVo E23Umxzk6lcFUw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxim Cournoyer Subject: Re: bug#74204: [bug#74112] Guix is not reproducible In-Reply-To: <87a5e7xxkl.fsf@gmail.com> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Sun, 10 Nov 2024 18:11:38 +0900") References: <87fro6yntj.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> <87ed3pzora.wl-hako@ultrarare.space> <87pln70w16.fsf@gmail.com> <87a5e7xxkl.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Quartidi 24 Brumaire an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9v?= =?utf-8?Q?olution=2C?= jour de l'Orange X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 11:01:35 +0100 Message-ID: <87o72ip20w.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74112-done Cc: 74112-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Jakob Kirsch , Simon Tournier , Hilton Chain , Guix Devel , 74204-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > Simon Tournier writes: [...] >> Maybe I am missing something. To my knowledge, .go files produced by >> Guile are not always reproducible, see bug#20272 [1]. And, from my >> understanding, Guix cannot be reproducible until this bug had been >> fixed. Therefore, I am not convinced that this patch is worth under >> this frame considering the build-time penalty it brings. >> >> That=E2=80=99s said, maybe it=E2=80=99s better than nothing and the pack= age =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 is >> barely built after all. I do not know. >> >> What people think? > > Perhaps we should set the default parallel-build? to #f in the > guile-build-system at least in the meantime, with a prominent comment as > to why and a reference to the upstream issue? Many Guile packages use > the gnu-build-system so that wouldn't cover all of them like > 'guix'... I'm not sure. Sounds good to me: packages using =E2=80=98guile-build-system=E2=80=99 are = usually relatively small so the impact is negligible. =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 is a little different because it takes so much time = to build sequentially=E2=80=A6 Ludo=E2=80=99. From unknown Sun Sep 07 16:50:39 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 12:24:06 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator