guile-sdl-0.5.2 fails to install on i686

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
5 participants
  • Thiago Jung Bauermann
  • Efraim Flashner
  • Luis Felipe López Acevedo
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Ricardo Wurmus
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
Severity
minor
L
L
Luis Felipe López Acevedo wrote on 26 Nov 2015 23:31
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
1448577083.28162.7.camel@openmailbox.org
Hi,

I'm using Guix 0.9.0 on Debian 8 (i686). Running the following command:

$ guix package -i guile-sdl

Results in the following error:

Toggle snippet (26 lines)
======================================
1 of 9 tests failed
(2 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org
======================================
Makefile:352: recipe for target 'check-TESTS' failed
make[2]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory
'/tmp/nix-build-guile-sdl-0.5.2.drv-0/guile-sdl-0.5.2/test'
Makefile:475: recipe for target 'check-am' failed
make[1]: *** [check-am] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory
'/tmp/nix-build-guile-sdl-0.5.2.drv-0/guile-sdl-0.5.2/test'
Makefile:415: recipe for target 'check-recursive' failed
make: *** [check-recursive] Error 1
phase `check' failed after 24.3 seconds
builder for
`/gnu/store/zq1lxrsqsn3xkzcg0z4s88j5pgjndijm-guile-sdl-0.5.2.drv' failed
with exit code 1
cannot build derivation
`/gnu/store/0wlwdvdj7xba6kljfwxxsg4ch7ckdrgs-profile.drv': 1
dependencies couldn't be built
guix package: error: build failed: build of
`/gnu/store/0wlwdvdj7xba6kljfwxxsg4ch7ckdrgs-profile.drv' failed

Hydra also says the package is failing to build:



Thanks,

--
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 29 Nov 2015 12:49
Guile-SDL 0.5.2 test failure i686-linux-gnu
(address . bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org)(address . 22020@debbugs.gnu.org)
874mg5m3dk.fsf@gnu.org
Hello!

On GNU Guix, we’re seeing one 100% reproducible test failure on
i686-linux-gnu:

Toggle snippet (22 lines)
/gnu/store/isxqjfaglyfsbcv75y8qbqbph8v28ykr-bash-4.3.39/bin/bash: line 5: 838 Segmentation fault (core dumped) HAVE_TTF=1 HAVE_MIXER=0 sh zow ${dir}$tst
FAIL: gfx.scm
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/misc/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/TTF/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/OTF/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/Type1/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/misc/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/TTF/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/OTF/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/Type1/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/
_FontTransOpen: Unable to Parse address ${prefix}/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/
PASS: fading.scm
======================================
1 of 9 tests failed
(2 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org
======================================

(Note that we run tests with the Xvfb server. See

The backtrace is mildly informative:

Toggle snippet (12 lines)
$ gdb $(type -P guile) core
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.10

[...]

(gdb) bt
#0 0xf4d98130 in SDL_imageFilterSubByteMMX (Src1=0x5d <error: Cannot access memory at address 0x5d>, Dest=0xffb429c8 "]",
SrcLength=4107944472, C=152 '\230') at SDL_imageFilter.c:2185
#1 0x09cfd470 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)

That SrcLength is so high suggests it might be an integer overflow.

This is with SDL_image 1.2.12.

To reproduce with Guix, run:

guix build guile-sdl -s i686-linux --keep-failed

Thanks,
Ludo’.
L
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 2 Jun 2016 21:41
control message for bug #22020
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87oa7j2xb1.fsf@gnu.org
severity 22020 minor
R
R
Ricardo Wurmus wrote on 14 May 2020 19:55
guile-sdl-0.5.2 fails to install on i686
(address . 22020@debbugs.gnu.org)(address . bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org)
87k11eiepr.fsf@elephly.net
Guile SDL 0.5.2 still fails on i686:

Toggle snippet (22 lines)
The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
/gnu/store/v1g7f3p4f0851mywrla8qmr9hb8jgfjr-bash-minimal-5.0.16/bin/bash: line 5: 6964 Segmentation fault HAVE_TTF=1 HAVE_MIXER=0 sh zow ${dir}$tst
FAIL: gfx.scm
The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
PASS: fading.scm
======================================
1 of 8 tests failed
(3 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org
======================================

I’m putting bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org in Cc, hoping that this time our
message can be delivered.

If this doesn’t work we should mark this package unsupported for
i686-linux.

--
Ricardo
E
E
Efraim Flashner wrote on 17 May 2020 14:05
(name . Ricardo Wurmus)(address . rekado@elephly.net)
20200517120548.GD31833@E5400
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 07:55:12PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
Toggle quote (35 lines)
> Guile SDL 0.5.2 still fails on i686:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> > Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
> Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
> The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> > Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
> Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
> /gnu/store/v1g7f3p4f0851mywrla8qmr9hb8jgfjr-bash-minimal-5.0.16/bin/bash: line 5: 6964 Segmentation fault HAVE_TTF=1 HAVE_MIXER=0 sh zow ${dir}$tst
> FAIL: gfx.scm
> The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> > Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
> Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
> The XKEYBOARD keymap compiler (xkbcomp) reports:
> > Internal error: Could not resolve keysym XF86FullScreen
> Errors from xkbcomp are not fatal to the X server
> PASS: fading.scm
> ======================================
> 1 of 8 tests failed
> (3 tests were not run)
> Please report to bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org
> ======================================
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> I’m putting bug-guile-sdl@gnu.org in Cc, hoping that this time our
> message can be delivered.
>
> If this doesn’t work we should mark this package unsupported for
> i686-linux.
>
> --
> Ricardo
>

I also took a look at this package last week and I saw it still failed
the tests on i686-linux. I would like to note, however, that it does
build and pass the test suite on powerpc-linux.

--
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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=l6EB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


T
T
Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote on 20 Jun 2022 00:59
[PATCH] gnu: guile-sdl: Update to 0.6.1
(address . 22020@debbugs.gnu.org)(name . Thiago Jung Bauermann)(address . bauermann@kolabnow.com)
20220619225911.105125-1-bauermann@kolabnow.com
This version's testsuite passes on i686-linux.


* gnu/packages/sdl.scm (guile-sdl): Update to 0.6.1.
---

Hello,

I was looking at bug 22020 (guile-sdl-0.5.2 fails to install on i686) and
noticed that upgrading guile-sdl to the latest version fixes the problem so
this is what this patch does.

Note that the diff between 0.5.3 and 0.6.1 has almost 24k lines so I didn't
even try skimming it.

I did verify the tarball's signature using the maintainer's (expired) public
key that I downloaded from Savannah¹:

$ gpg --verify guile-sdl-0.6.1.tar.lz.sig
gpg: assuming signed data in 'guile-sdl-0.6.1.tar.lz'
gpg: Signature made Sun Feb 20 21:16:09 2022 -03
gpg: using DSA key 748EA0E81CB8A7489BFA6CE4670322244C807502
gpg: Good signature from "Thien-Thi Nguyen (software signing) <ttn@gnuvola.org>" [expired]
gpg: aka "Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>" [expired]
gpg: aka "Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnu.org>" [expired]
gpg: Note: This key has expired!
Primary key fingerprint: 748E A0E8 1CB8 A748 9BFA 6CE4 6703 2224 4C80 7502

I'll send a message to the guile-sdl mailing list suggesting them to publish
a new key.

Thanks,
Thiago


gnu/packages/sdl.scm | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Toggle diff (24 lines)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/sdl.scm b/gnu/packages/sdl.scm
index 4c38e2f05507..49bc09312a13 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/sdl.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/sdl.scm
@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ (define-public sdl2-ttf
(define-public guile-sdl
(package
(name "guile-sdl")
- (version "0.5.3")
+ (version "0.6.1")
(source (origin
(method url-fetch)
(uri
@@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ (define-public guile-sdl
version ".tar.lz"))
(sha256
(base32
- "040gyk3n3yp8i30ngdg97n3083g8b6laky2nlh10jqcyjdd550d6"))))
+ "1q985nd3birr5pny74915x098fisa6llas3ijgf1b4gdz5717nzz"))))
(build-system gnu-build-system)
(native-inputs
`(("lzip" ,lzip)

base-commit: 73761d8049f483e6685c2c736872d0366e03238a
E
E
Efraim Flashner wrote on 1 Sep 2022 15:07
(name . Thiago Jung Bauermann)(address . bauermann@kolabnow.com)(address . 22020-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
YxCuq8Vg8OyxlbsS@3900XT
It's been a while since you submitted this patch, but it's applied now.
Thanks!

--
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-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAmMQrqsACgkQQarn3Mo9
g1EU/A/+LgJfa4mbirph+nhqHE3YjCuf4nerZvTavmnKzZE26DzSNQCROIdLpQwY
nwJct6/SqUDwLOv/ZMymTEedpEBYd0dAIG/Ag9dN5CTJZin/7lirZup1HnR51sEn
g8jJgP0lXMbLbup6FntNFvO1llh/53O5UMO2tSryJ8FcggoJpUZz/nTXnV8/3/58
Fc/f+jxa23tQQzYFyVK0y+0EyI/uhAXQ7jt5MKiMkJzSc7/w9BQRn+21LfozVBWZ
afLnSbfhaqmQrfKA6HNuZPoLK3ebM3KjlUFGGrzrWB+A25v4zagRzD2fU2zs0+vI
aV8ZA+lPzrJ1wnCzFYF2eevKQMaXX7xTMGrRo8mcjQWQ6oBeLYn+sUJGeYWYsrXE
jk4mJDj3fqLHaCkTlk0chklsgqFxbgFk9461+qcoTqlYUhVvvJtgSI+I3lwSTTOk
D+6z4nSk7eK0txdFUyhhPvXRx2XDCGBtFMwH/nS+ZoL/aw+0BcxZGZ/nicqKKAma
eXNxlN0fZoWTufCT66+Z4+YgU/fFQeIt8mQxFK+jqCIKwIuWG9vXgrNErbej8CF8
TkhwQQ1RDFtAlB1c0+HUHIUAiK5qlebnr80F872plZeRvS1l/oF62AsHvdBD+1rk
Lr3Lqf3ySgUg47fPK72Urncmv+860ERUEw6oJtqvsvFGVCH36LY=
=PxOf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Closed
T
T
Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote on 3 Sep 2022 04:58
(name . Efraim Flashner)(address . efraim@flashner.co.il)(address . 22020-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
87zgfh88pb.fsf@kolabnow.com
Hello Efraim,

Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> writes:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> It's been a while since you submitted this patch, but it's applied now.
> Thanks!

I had forgotten about this patch. Thank you!

--
Thanks
Thiago
Closed
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 22020@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 22020
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