go incremental builds broken

  • Open
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
6 participants
  • Efraim Flashner
  • Hank Donnay
  • Leo Famulari
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Maxime Devos
  • zimoun
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Hank Donnay
Severity
normal
H
H
Hank Donnay wrote on 16 Feb 2017 16:05
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
CAD4UWkjnkSBYmAfk+E5QAvO9H29Y1xS2vu_h8eB3ZypJ=7NHwg@mail.gmail.com
Hello,

It seems the guix's go package is broken when the go tool is used for
incremental builds. Any attempt to use 'install' or 'build -i' results
in an attempt to write to the store. A one-liner:

guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
$t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd
&& rm -rf $t'

Another command reports that (seemingly) the entire stdlib is marked as stale:

guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
$t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go list -f '\''{{join
.Deps "\n"}}'\'' cmd/go | xargs -n1 go list -f '\''{{if
.Stale}}{{.ImportPath}}: {{.StaleReason}}{{end}}'\''; cd && rm -rf $t'

The function for determining staleness is here (after the giant
comment explaining the reasoning):

I don't see anything wrong with the package definition, but could be
missing something. My only hunch at this point is that something might
be modifying src/runtime/internal/sys/zversion.go, as that entire file
is included in the build ID computation.

Thanks,
H
H
Hank Donnay wrote on 24 Feb 2017 20:50
Re: bug#25752: Acknowledgement (go incremental builds broken)
(address . 25752@debbugs.gnu.org)
CAD4UWkjG0POAOYM-E90k2UDFFhnro1s5wd3qT1=pZPMqhOLTXw@mail.gmail.com
After talking on IRC, it seems like grafts are the problem. Adding
`--no-grafts` to the above commands has them succeed.

The GOROOT (store location, in this case) gets encoded in the
generated source by the 'dist' tool, so changing that is going to
cause issues.

Is there a way to disable grafts on a per-package basis, in the definition?

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:06 AM, GNU bug Tracking System
<help-debbugs@gnu.org> wrote:
Toggle quote (21 lines)
> Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org.
>
> This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
> has been received.
>
> Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
> interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course.
>
> Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
> bug-guix@gnu.org
>
> If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please
> send it to 25752@debbugs.gnu.org.
>
> Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@gnu.org unless you wish
> to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.
>
> --
> 25752: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=25752
> GNU Bug Tracking System
> Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
L
L
Leo Famulari wrote on 25 Feb 2017 16:58
(name . Hank Donnay)(address . hdonnay@gmail.com)(address . 25752@debbugs.gnu.org)
20170225155814.GB3227@jasmine
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:50:10PM -0500, Hank Donnay wrote:
Toggle quote (9 lines)
> After talking on IRC, it seems like grafts are the problem. Adding
> `--no-grafts` to the above commands has them succeed.
>
> The GOROOT (store location, in this case) gets encoded in the
> generated source by the 'dist' tool, so changing that is going to
> cause issues.
>
> Is there a way to disable grafts on a per-package basis, in the definition?

You can disable them on the command-line for any tool that builds
things, using the '--no-grafts' option, which is a "Common build option"
[0]. For example, `guix environment --ad-hoc go --no-grafts`.

If you do this, you should understand that the ungrafted Go package will
contain some serious security vulnerabilities, since we only use grafts
to fix vulnerabilities in core packages. [1]

We should figure out why this issue manifests when go is grafted, and
fix the root cause.

[0]

[1]
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 7 Mar 2017 22:50
Re: bug#25752: go incremental builds broken
(name . Hank Donnay)(address . hdonnay@gmail.com)(address . 25752@debbugs.gnu.org)
87fuiorc3b.fsf@gnu.org
Hello,

Hank Donnay <hdonnay@gmail.com> skribis:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> The function for determining staleness is here (after the giant
> comment explaining the reasoning):
> https://golang.org/src/cmd/go/pkg.go#L1111

This method relies on the build ID to, which is defined like this (info
"(ld) Options"):

`--build-id'
`--build-id=STYLE'
Request the creation of a `.note.gnu.build-id' ELF note section or
a `.buildid' COFF section. The contents of the note are unique
bits identifying this linked file. STYLE can be `uuid' to use 128
random bits, `sha1' to use a 160-bit SHA1 hash on the normative
parts of the output contents, `md5' to use a 128-bit MD5 hash on
the normative parts of the output contents, or `0xHEXSTRING' to
use a chosen bit string specified as an even number of hexadecimal
digits (`-' and `:' characters between digit pairs are ignored).
If STYLE is omitted, `sha1' is used.

The `md5' and `sha1' styles produces an identifier that is always
the same in an identical output file, but will be unique among all
nonidentical output files. It is not intended to be compared as a
checksum for the file's contents. A linked file may be changed
later by other tools, but the build ID bit string identifying the
original linked file does not change.

Passing `none' for STYLE disables the setting from any
`--build-id' options earlier on the command line.

I suppose Go uses one of md5 or sha1, which is a good thing since it
allows for reproducible builds.

However, grafting breaks this, similarly to https://bugs.gnu.org/19973
since they change file contents without recomputing the build ID.

Having Go use --build-id=uuid would work around the problem, but it
would also prevent bit-reproducible builds.

Perhaps our grafting code will have to handle .note.gnu.build-id
specially.

Thoughts?

Thanks for reporting the issue,
Ludo’.
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 18 Dec 2020 21:00
Re: bug#25752: Acknowledgement (go incremental builds broken)
(name . Leo Famulari)(address . leo@famulari.name)
86mtyavq9d.fsf@gmail.com
Hi,

On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 at 10:58, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
Toggle quote (21 lines)
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:50:10PM -0500, Hank Donnay wrote:
>> After talking on IRC, it seems like grafts are the problem. Adding
>> `--no-grafts` to the above commands has them succeed.
>>
>> The GOROOT (store location, in this case) gets encoded in the
>> generated source by the 'dist' tool, so changing that is going to
>> cause issues.
>>
>> Is there a way to disable grafts on a per-package basis, in the definition?
>
> You can disable them on the command-line for any tool that builds
> things, using the '--no-grafts' option, which is a "Common build option"
> [0]. For example, `guix environment --ad-hoc go --no-grafts`.
>
> If you do this, you should understand that the ungrafted Go package will
> contain some serious security vulnerabilities, since we only use grafts
> to fix vulnerabilities in core packages. [1]
>
> We should figure out why this issue manifests when go is grafted, and
> fix the root cause.

I suspect closing this bug had been forgotten. If yes, feel free to
close it. Otherwise, I do not understand what is the next actionable
step.


All the best,
simon
L
L
Leo Famulari wrote on 18 Dec 2020 22:31
(name . zimoun)(address . zimon.toutoune@gmail.com)
X90fuo+5BdnG7q8P@jasmine.lan
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:00:14PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
Toggle quote (4 lines)
> I suspect closing this bug had been forgotten. If yes, feel free to
> close it. Otherwise, I do not understand what is the next actionable
> step.

I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
Guix, unless I missed a new development.
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 11 Jan 2021 13:46
(name . Leo Famulari)(address . leo@famulari.name)
86im83tzd3.fsf@gmail.com
Hi Leo,

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
> Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
> Guix, unless I missed a new development.

Thanks. Could you provide a Go example for reproducing? Well, a
reproducer to track what could be wrong on the grafting mechanism for
Go. If I understand correctly.


All the best,
simon
E
E
Efraim Flashner wrote on 11 Jan 2021 21:01
(name . zimoun)(address . zimon.toutoune@gmail.com)
X/yujodIHrnX0s3T@3900XT
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:46:48PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
Toggle quote (13 lines)
> Hi Leo,
>
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>
> > I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
> > Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
> > Guix, unless I missed a new development.
>
> Thanks. Could you provide a Go example for reproducing? Well, a
> reproducer to track what could be wrong on the grafting mechanism for
> Go. If I understand correctly.
>

I actually spent a bit of time on this today/yesterday. I modified the
go-build-system to copy the pkg and src folders from build to build
(instead of just the src folders) and the pkg folders were ignored.
Upstream documentation isn't clear about when the pkg folder is used and
when it is ignored.

One thing I did try was to set the pkgdir to (string-append (getenv
"GOROOT") "/pkg"), but then it didn't find the pkg folder from go:out. I
didn't try copying go:out/pkg to GOROOT/pkg to see if that would fix it;
I assumed that even if it did work we wouldn't want to propagate all of
go with the go packages.

--
Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> ????? ?????
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=Clx4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 9 Jun 2021 23:38
(name . Efraim Flashner)(address . efraim@flashner.co.il)
86v96mlnv9.fsf@gmail.com
Hi,

On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 22:01, Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> wrote:
Toggle quote (24 lines)
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:46:48PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>>
>> > I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
>> > Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
>> > Guix, unless I missed a new development.
>>
>> Thanks. Could you provide a Go example for reproducing? Well, a
>> reproducer to track what could be wrong on the grafting mechanism for
>> Go. If I understand correctly.
>>
>
> I actually spent a bit of time on this today/yesterday. I modified the
> go-build-system to copy the pkg and src folders from build to build
> (instead of just the src folders) and the pkg folders were ignored.
> Upstream documentation isn't clear about when the pkg folder is used and
> when it is ignored.
>
> One thing I did try was to set the pkgdir to (string-append (getenv
> "GOROOT") "/pkg"), but then it didn't find the pkg folder from go:out. I
> didn't try copying go:out/pkg to GOROOT/pkg to see if that would fix it;
> I assumed that even if it did work we wouldn't want to propagate all of
> go with the go packages.

What is the status of this bug? Since I am not using Go at all, it is
hard for me to have a reproducer. Is it possible to provide a
reproducer? Thanks.

Cheers,
simon
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 14 Sep 2021 12:43
bug#25752: go incremental builds broken
(name . Leo Famulari)(address . leo@famulari.name)
86zgsftp3c.fsf_-_@gmail.com
Hi,

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
Toggle quote (9 lines)
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:00:14PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>> I suspect closing this bug had been forgotten. If yes, feel free to
>> close it. Otherwise, I do not understand what is the next actionable
>> step.
>
> I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
> Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
> Guix, unless I missed a new development.

What is the status of this bug? Since I am not using Go at all, it is
hard for me to have a reproducer. Is it possible to provide a
reproducer? Thanks.

Cheers,
simon

PS: I asked the same thing 13 weeks ago. Therefore, without any answer
and giving this bug is really old not so much commented, I propose to
close it.
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 14 Sep 2021 12:39
control message for bug #25752
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
8635q7v3tz.fsf@gmail.com
tags 25752 + moreinfo
quit
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 26 Nov 2021 02:12
Re: bug#25752: Acknowledgement (go incremental builds broken)
(name . Efraim Flashner)(address . efraim@flashner.co.il)
86fsrjsosb.fsf@gmail.com
Hi,

On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 22:01, Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> wrote:
Toggle quote (24 lines)
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:46:48PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>>
>> > I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
>> > Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
>> > Guix, unless I missed a new development.
>>
>> Thanks. Could you provide a Go example for reproducing? Well, a
>> reproducer to track what could be wrong on the grafting mechanism for
>> Go. If I understand correctly.
>>
>
> I actually spent a bit of time on this today/yesterday. I modified the
> go-build-system to copy the pkg and src folders from build to build
> (instead of just the src folders) and the pkg folders were ignored.
> Upstream documentation isn't clear about when the pkg folder is used and
> when it is ignored.
>
> One thing I did try was to set the pkgdir to (string-append (getenv
> "GOROOT") "/pkg"), but then it didn't find the pkg folder from go:out. I
> didn't try copying go:out/pkg to GOROOT/pkg to see if that would fix it;
> I assumed that even if it did work we wouldn't want to propagate all of
> go with the go packages.

What is the status of this old bug [1]? It is marked ’moreinfo’ because
it misses a reproducer to be able to act on. Therefore, I am going to
close it.


Cheers,
simon
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 26 Oct 2022 22:42
Re: bug#25752: go incremental builds broken
(name . Leo Famulari)(address . leo@famulari.name)
86h6zqb9ku.fsf@gmail.com
Hi,

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 at 12:43, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
Toggle quote (18 lines)
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:00:14PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>>> I suspect closing this bug had been forgotten. If yes, feel free to
>>> close it. Otherwise, I do not understand what is the next actionable
>>> step.
>>
>> I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
>> Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
>> Guix, unless I missed a new development.
>
> What is the status of this bug? Since I am not using Go at all, it is
> hard for me to have a reproducer. Is it possible to provide a
> reproducer? Thanks.

> PS: I asked the same thing 13 weeks ago. Therefore, without any answer
> and giving this bug is really old not so much commented, I propose to
> close it.

Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 23:38:50 +0200 (1 year, 19 weeks, 5 days ago)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 02:12:36 +0100 (47 weeks, 5 days, 19 hours ago)

Go incremental is still not functional but is it worth to keep this
report open?

Giving the none activity of this bug and no reply about the status after
waiting a long time, I will close it if no objection.


Cheers,
simon
M
M
Maxime Devos wrote on 27 Oct 2022 12:21
2fd2b8b4-0c0c-6689-0ca3-316ad12acb80@telenet.be
On 26-10-2022 22:42, zimoun wrote:
Toggle quote (16 lines)
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 at 12:43, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 16:31, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:00:14PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>>>> I suspect closing this bug had been forgotten. If yes, feel free to
>>>> close it. Otherwise, I do not understand what is the next actionable
>>>> step.
>>>
>>> I don't think this bug has been fixed, although I have not checked.
>>> Currently, Go incremental builds and library re-use is not functional in
>>> Guix, unless I missed a new development.
>>
>> What is the status of this bug? Since I am not using Go at all, it is
>> hard for me to have a reproducer. Is it possible to provide a
>> reproducer? Thanks. [...]
A reproducer was given in
guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
$t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd
&& rm -rf $t'
guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
$t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go list -f '\''{{join
.Deps "\n"}}'\'' cmd/go | xargs -n1 go list -f '\''{{if
.Stale}}{{.ImportPath}}: {{.StaleReason}}{{end}}'\''; cd && rm -rf $t'
I don't know if this reproducer still works/fails.
Greetings,
Maxime.
Attachment: OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 28 Oct 2022 10:22
86tu3o73xt.fsf@gmail.com
Hi,

On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 12:21, Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> wrote:

Toggle quote (7 lines)
> A reproducer was given in
> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/25752#0>:
>
> guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
> $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd
> && rm -rf $t'

Toggle snippet (14 lines)
$ guix shell -C go bash coreutils -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd && echo $t'
[...]

# runtime/cgo
cgo: C compiler "gcc" not found: exec: "gcc": executable file not found in $PATH
/tmp/tmp.srzPbcMLCc

$ guix shell -C go bash coreutils gcc-toolchain -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd && echo $t'
[...]

go install cmd/go: copying /tmp/go-build1675975230/b001/exe/a.out: open /gnu/store/82adn4rx1h5fc7zms5g0ymwr8dk060nh-go-1.19.1/lib/go/bin/go: read-only file system
/tmp/tmp.qOfxzeZDxH

Well, as I am not a Go user, what is the expected result of the command?


Efraim commented:

I actually spent a bit of time on this today/yesterday. I
modified the go-build-system to copy the pkg and src folders
from build to build (instead of just the src folders) and the
pkg folders were ignored. Upstream documentation isn't clear
about when the pkg folder is used and when it is ignored.




Cheers,
simon
S
S
Simon Tournier wrote on 17 Oct 2023 00:44
(name . Maxime Devos)(address . maximedevos@telenet.be)
86sf6ap4pt.fsf@gmail.com
Hi Go team,

I was reviewing the status of old bugs and I find bug#25752


Since I am not a Go user, is it possible that Go team says if this bug
is still worth keeping open?

On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 at 10:22, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
Toggle quote (35 lines)
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 12:21, Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> wrote:
>
>> A reproducer was given in
>> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/25752#0>:
>>
>> guix environment --ad-hoc go -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd
>> $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd
>> && rm -rf $t'
>
> $ guix shell -C go bash coreutils -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd && echo $t'
> [...]
>
> # runtime/cgo
> cgo: C compiler "gcc" not found: exec: "gcc": executable file not found in $PATH
> /tmp/tmp.srzPbcMLCc
>
> $ guix shell -C go bash coreutils gcc-toolchain -- bash -c 'export t=$(mktemp -d); cd $t && export GOPATH=$(pwd) GOBIN=$(pwd)/bin && go install cmd/go; cd && echo $t'
> [...]
>
> go install cmd/go: copying /tmp/go-build1675975230/b001/exe/a.out: open /gnu/store/82adn4rx1h5fc7zms5g0ymwr8dk060nh-go-1.19.1/lib/go/bin/go: read-only file system
> /tmp/tmp.qOfxzeZDxH
>
> Well, as I am not a Go user, what is the expected result of the command?
>
>
> Efraim commented:
>
> I actually spent a bit of time on this today/yesterday. I
> modified the go-build-system to copy the pkg and src folders
> from build to build (instead of just the src folders) and the
> pkg folders were ignored. Upstream documentation isn't clear
> about when the pkg folder is used and when it is ignored.
>
> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/25752#7>

Well, as I previously mentioned, I do not know what is the expected
result of the reproduced. :-)

Cheers,
simon
?
Your comment

Commenting via the web interface is currently disabled.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 25752@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 25752
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch