Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
(This is a separate copy to the list, just to keep everyone informed.
No attachment included.)
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 04:49:15PM +1300, Michael Cree wrote:
> I don't seem to have received that message.
I'll try sending again just to you... The attached "packages" file was
on the order of 500k, and it's possible an upstream mailer got offended
at the message size. In *this* letter, I'll append the list gzipped.
Here's the relevant portion of that earlier posting:
gcc is version 9.2.1 (Debian 9.2.1-19)
ld is version 2.33.1 (binutils 2.33.1-4)
kernel version is 5.3.0 built from the kernel.org source tree
Other packages are as in the attached "packages" file ("dpkg -l"
output).
Started the "guile-2.2" build. So far, so good after 12+ hours :-).
--Bob
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 07:02:15PM -0600, Bob Tracy wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:00:59PM +1300, Michael Cree wrote: > > Did you build with latest toolchain? I suspect the issue has > > appeared with toolchain changes (hard to pin down when because there > > was quite a period in which a new version of guile-2.0 was not > > uploaded). > > I think I answered the toolchain question in my reply to Adrian's > earlier message. There was an attached "packages" file with the complete > list of what I've got installed on the PWS. I don't seem to have received that message. Taking it that you did use up to date toolchain then that is rather interesting that guile-2.0 built for you. I ran a test rebuild a week or two ago and it failed. Maybe I should try again, but if it fails for me again that would raise issues of: - UP versus SMP since I test built on an SMP system. - sbuild environment. I will set a test rebuild going again soon and report back. > are only loosely specified (e.g., >= some value), are the dependencies > considered "best" satisfied with a stable package version meeting the > requirement? Or is the current unstable version of a dependency > preferred when building for "sid"? Many variables to consider, I guess. Yes, built against up to date sid. Cheers Michael.
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:00:59PM +1300, Michael Cree wrote: > Did you build with latest toolchain? I suspect the issue has > appeared with toolchain changes (hard to pin down when because there > was quite a period in which a new version of guile-2.0 was not > uploaded). > > And the bug (a segfault when texi documentation is built with the > recently built guild executable) looks to be present elsewhere too > (take a look at #941218 where comment #10 seen on Ubuntu looks > suspiciously like what we see on Alpha assuming it occurs at the > same place). I think I answered the toolchain question in my reply to Adrian's earlier message. There was an attached "packages" file with the complete list of what I've got installed on the PWS. > Unless built in clean chroot with only the build dependencies installed > and with an up to date toolchain they won't be much use to us. The toolchain is up-to-date, but I don't have the infrastructure to support a clean chroot environment, even on another local system if I were to try and use a cross-compiler vs. a native build. In reference to the build dependencies, if particular versions aren't specified, or are only loosely specified (e.g., >= some value), are the dependencies considered "best" satisfied with a stable package version meeting the requirement? Or is the current unstable version of a dependency preferred when building for "sid"? Many variables to consider, I guess. --Bob
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 06:40:04AM -0600, Bob Tracy wrote: > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 07:36:11AM +1300, Michael Cree wrote: > > That's not going to help at the moment because vim is bd-uninstallable. > > > > The real problem is guile-2.0 and guile-2.2, both of which FTBFS, and > > are blocking the building of many other packages. > > I downloaded the Debian source for "guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3" and successfully > built the binary packages on my PWS-433au without having to modify anything. > My guess is some kind of toolchain or other build environment issue on > the "buildd" servers. Did you build with latest toolchain? I suspect the issue has appeared with toolchain changes (hard to pin down when because there was quite a period in which a new version of guile-2.0 was not uploaded). And the bug (a segfault when texi documentation is built with the recently built guild executable) looks to be present elsewhere too (take a look at #941218 where comment #10 seen on Ubuntu looks suspiciously like what we see on Alpha assuming it occurs at the same place). > Michael -- I've got the following ".deb" packages available, and you're > welcome to them if they would be of any help getting us unstuck: Unless built in clean chroot with only the build dependencies installed and with an up to date toolchain they won't be much use to us. Cheers, Michael.
RE: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
Thanks. That answers my question ;-) I was thinking if they were on GitLab or similar one could pull intermediate builds for testing. If someone could kindly provide the link for issues for Alpha that would be most helpful. =Skye -Original Message- From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [mailto:glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 8:44 AM To: Skye; 'Bob Tracy'; 'Michael Cree'; debian-alpha@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22 On 11/25/19 4:41 PM, Skye wrote: > Are the build servers for Alpha public facing? I plan to test install on > Alpha in a few day and having access to the code and environment could prove > useful. What do you mean with "public facing"? They are on the internet, of course, but they are not publicly accessible for obvious reasons. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
Hi Bob! On 11/25/19 1:40 PM, Bob Tracy wrote: > I downloaded the Debian source for "guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3" and successfully > built the binary packages on my PWS-433au without having to modify anything. > My guess is some kind of toolchain or other build environment issue on > the "buildd" servers. What build environment did you use? Were you on the latest version of gcc-9 and binutils? Was the default compiler gcc-9 or anything lower? > Michael -- I've got the following ".deb" packages available, and you're > welcome to them if they would be of any help getting us unstuck: > > guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb > guile-2.0-libs_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb > guile-2.0-dev_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb > guile-2.0-libs-dbgsym_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb > guile-2.0-doc_2.0.13+1-5.3_all.deb > > Just need a place to upload them where you can get to them, or I could > send them as e-mail attachments if all else fails: the "libs" package is > the largest at 2,262,128 bytes. In order to be able to use them, you need the .changes and .buildinfo files as well. And the build must not include the all.deb package, only the architecture-dependent packages. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
RE: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
Are the build servers for Alpha public facing? I plan to test install on Alpha in a few day and having access to the code and environment could prove useful. =Skye -Original Message- From: Bob Tracy [mailto:r...@frus.com] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 5:40 AM To: Michael Cree; John Paul Adrian Glaubitz; debian-alpha@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22 On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 07:36:11AM +1300, Michael Cree wrote: > That's not going to help at the moment because vim is bd-uninstallable. > > The real problem is guile-2.0 and guile-2.2, both of which FTBFS, and > are blocking the building of many other packages. I downloaded the Debian source for "guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3" and successfully built the binary packages on my PWS-433au without having to modify anything. My guess is some kind of toolchain or other build environment issue on the "buildd" servers. Michael -- I've got the following ".deb" packages available, and you're welcome to them if they would be of any help getting us unstuck: guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-libs_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-dev_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-libs-dbgsym_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-doc_2.0.13+1-5.3_all.deb Just need a place to upload them where you can get to them, or I could send them as e-mail attachments if all else fails: the "libs" package is the largest at 2,262,128 bytes. I'll get started on trying to build "guile-2.2" later today. --Bob
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
On 11/25/19 4:41 PM, Skye wrote: > Are the build servers for Alpha public facing? I plan to test install on > Alpha in a few day and having access to the code and environment could prove > useful. What do you mean with "public facing"? They are on the internet, of course, but they are not publicly accessible for obvious reasons. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-11-22
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 07:36:11AM +1300, Michael Cree wrote: > That's not going to help at the moment because vim is bd-uninstallable. > > The real problem is guile-2.0 and guile-2.2, both of which FTBFS, and > are blocking the building of many other packages. I downloaded the Debian source for "guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3" and successfully built the binary packages on my PWS-433au without having to modify anything. My guess is some kind of toolchain or other build environment issue on the "buildd" servers. Michael -- I've got the following ".deb" packages available, and you're welcome to them if they would be of any help getting us unstuck: guile-2.0_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-libs_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-dev_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-libs-dbgsym_2.0.13+1-5.3_alpha.deb guile-2.0-doc_2.0.13+1-5.3_all.deb Just need a place to upload them where you can get to them, or I could send them as e-mail attachments if all else fails: the "libs" package is the largest at 2,262,128 bytes. I'll get started on trying to build "guile-2.2" later today. --Bob
