Re: branch core-updates updated: gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures.
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 03:56:24PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, Sorry for taking a while to get back to answer this. > Efraim Flashner skribis: > > > On December 12, 2022 1:47:29 PM UTC, "Ludovic Courtès" wrote: > > [...] > > >>> + ,@(if (target-arm?) > >>> + ;; Some binaries fail to build. > >>> + `(#:configure-flags '(,(string-append > >>> +"--enable-no-install-program=" > >>> +;; the defaults > >>> +"arch,coreutils,hostname" > >>> +;; fails on aarch64 > >>> +",timeout,sort"))) > >> > >>Isn’t there a risk that things will break down the road if ‘sort’, > >>‘hostname’, etc. are missing? How hard would it be to address the build > >>failure instead? > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Ludo’. > > > > I built all the way out to hello without any problems. Also %final-inputs > > has coreutils-final, so it really shouldn't be noticable. > > That’s odd though. Isn’t there some upstream patch we could take? > Surely ‘sort’ has no reason to contain arch-specific code? > > If there’s no such patch, we can go with the patch above, but then there > should be a comment linking to bug reports and reassuring the reader > that yes, some packages do build even without these commands. :-) In file included from src/timeout.c:53:0: /gnu/store/4fy2658sxphy1kgclxrrmcka6lwiwap0-glibc-bootstrap-0/include/sys/prctl.h:22:66: fatal error: linux/prctl.h: No such file or directory #include /* The magic values come from here */ I'm not sure if it's because armhf and aarch64 are using %bootstrap-glibc vs glibc-2.16, but I didn't see this problem with glibc-mesboot or with the %bootstrap-glibc from architectures using 2.31. Other workarounds I thought of were adding in a glibc-boot0 here to replace libc for everybody or using an older version (the last one in the 8 series), but this seemed like the least invasive option for now. I've also added a comment so it'll be clearer what's happening there. > (There’s no “coreutils” command BTW, unless enabling the > everything-in-one-binary trick, no?) It turns out coreutils does allow for that. > Thanks, > Ludo’. -- Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: branch core-updates updated: gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures.
Hi, Efraim Flashner skribis: > On December 12, 2022 1:47:29 PM UTC, "Ludovic Courtès" wrote: [...] >>> + ,@(if (target-arm?) >>> + ;; Some binaries fail to build. >>> + `(#:configure-flags '(,(string-append >>> +"--enable-no-install-program=" >>> +;; the defaults >>> +"arch,coreutils,hostname" >>> +;; fails on aarch64 >>> +",timeout,sort"))) >> >>Isn’t there a risk that things will break down the road if ‘sort’, >>‘hostname’, etc. are missing? How hard would it be to address the build >>failure instead? >> >>Thanks, >>Ludo’. > > I built all the way out to hello without any problems. Also %final-inputs has > coreutils-final, so it really shouldn't be noticable. That’s odd though. Isn’t there some upstream patch we could take? Surely ‘sort’ has no reason to contain arch-specific code? If there’s no such patch, we can go with the patch above, but then there should be a comment linking to bug reports and reassuring the reader that yes, some packages do build even without these commands. :-) (There’s no “coreutils” command BTW, unless enabling the everything-in-one-binary trick, no?) Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: branch core-updates updated: gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures.
On December 12, 2022 1:47:29 PM UTC, "Ludovic Courtès" wrote: >Hello, > >guix-comm...@gnu.org skribis: > >> commit 9782c4529249c8300501202112c095a6589845d3 >> Author: Efraim Flashner >> AuthorDate: Sun Dec 11 22:35:06 2022 +0200 >> >> gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures. >> >> * gnu/packages/commencement.scm (coreutils-boot0)[arguments]: When >> building for arm architectures skip building some programs. > >[…] > >> + ,@(if (target-arm?) >> + ;; Some binaries fail to build. >> + `(#:configure-flags '(,(string-append >> +"--enable-no-install-program=" >> +;; the defaults >> +"arch,coreutils,hostname" >> +;; fails on aarch64 >> +",timeout,sort"))) > >Isn’t there a risk that things will break down the road if ‘sort’, >‘hostname’, etc. are missing? How hard would it be to address the build >failure instead? > >Thanks, >Ludo’. I built all the way out to hello without any problems. Also %final-inputs has coreutils-final, so it really shouldn't be noticable. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: branch core-updates updated: gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures.
Hello, guix-comm...@gnu.org skribis: > commit 9782c4529249c8300501202112c095a6589845d3 > Author: Efraim Flashner > AuthorDate: Sun Dec 11 22:35:06 2022 +0200 > > gnu: coreutils-boot0: Fix building on arm architectures. > > * gnu/packages/commencement.scm (coreutils-boot0)[arguments]: When > building for arm architectures skip building some programs. […] > + ,@(if (target-arm?) > + ;; Some binaries fail to build. > + `(#:configure-flags '(,(string-append > +"--enable-no-install-program=" > +;; the defaults > +"arch,coreutils,hostname" > +;; fails on aarch64 > +",timeout,sort"))) Isn’t there a risk that things will break down the road if ‘sort’, ‘hostname’, etc. are missing? How hard would it be to address the build failure instead? Thanks, Ludo’.
