union-build incorrectly handles grafts

OpenSubmitted by John Kehayias.
Details
2 participants
  • John Kehayias
  • Ludovic Courtès
Owner
unassigned
Severity
normal
J
J
John Kehayias wrote on 21 Jan 07:48 +0100
(name . bug-guix@gnu.org)(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
qb5FfnNru71KLpoam6DFtOq9W760IINWc1JT8EiB72076ZcVyxELMaZ5eNs_FySDi8W16xDWcw0hQkNG0wSs21T6XmrAkB-QNwG-RHzY3do=@protonmail.com
Hello Guix,

Stumbled upon a mysterious problem today with grafts. Let me report what I see and how to reproduce it:

I'm attaching a minimal working example of the problem, namely using union-build creates the wrong symlink when a package has a propagated input that has a replacement. At least that seems to be the key ingredients. (Note the code originally came from another channel, so I left the header intact. The union-build looks the same as in e.g. python-pyqt+qscintilla though.)

It looks like a link is made to a wrong (i.e. previous) version library. It is pointing to the replacement package in the store, but trying to use the previous name.

If I run the attached file with guix build -f graft-test.scm and look at libexpat in the created package with, e.g.

ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib/libexpat*

I get

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1

Note that the last link is broken: looking at this expat library (2.4.3, the replacement) it has

-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 961 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so -> libexpat.so.1.8.3*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> libexpat.so.1.8.3*
-r-xr-xr-x 2 root root 191K Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.3*

This is why the last link from the union-build package is broken, it tries to point to libexpat.so.1.8.1 (the previous version, but in the newer version's directory).

There are no error or warnings that I saw in building the package or in a profile (e.g. guix shell). I put in an output in the builder to see what directories were passed to the union-build, giving me

directories: (/gnu/store/d0xskl9xjb0z6miaf87xszi8iq6h8sqs-apr-util-1.6.1 /gnu/store/iwcw80p8lkqsqbvchjvypvl06qlbjc3d-expat-2.4.1)

So the original expat propagated-input store directory is passed to the builder (as expected), but in the end it does use the replacement version. Just with a version number gone wrong in a library link.

I came across this actually when combining both x86_64 and i686 into a single profile. There it would error on a conflict between file and directory, but in the lib/cmake of expat, again something with different version numbers appearing but between x86_64 and i686. I don't have an example of that handy right now, but it sent me in the direction of seeing why expat was coming up, when I came across this (I'm guessing leading to the problem I saw).

In case it is relevant, I did notice other packages have had explicit replacements used in propagated inputs previously, like in https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=c5df560fd3762c0dbe99562f52223c73d445e597expat is propagated by fontconfig and apr-util, possibly other places? A bit tricky to search with the expat license and all.

This was on commit: e415a73d2c11e43f4db3b797ed73ab6ebcc336e0 My original problem (conflict in x86_64 and i686 union) happened after the expat replacement commit, 2045852b096131a714409aa0cc4fe17938f60b15 which was my first clue.

I hope that is helpful in reproducing and finding out what is happening. Something to do with union-build I guess, but it is very late here right now so I hope this all made sense. Happy to help investigate and debug.

John
;;; GNU Guix --- Functional package management for GNU ;;; Copyright © 2020 pkill-9 ;;; Copyright © 2020, 2021 ison <ison@airmail.cc> ;;; Copyright © 2021 pineapples ;;; Copyright © 2021 Jean-Baptiste Volatier <jbv@pm.me> ;;; Copyright © 2021 Kozo <kozodev@runbox.com> ;;; Copyright © 2021 John Kehayias <john.kehayias@protonmail.com> ;;; ;;; This file is not part of GNU Guix. ;;; ;;; GNU Guix is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it ;;; under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by ;;; the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or (at ;;; your option) any later version. ;;; ;;; GNU Guix is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but ;;; WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of ;;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the ;;; GNU General Public License for more details. ;;; ;;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License ;;; along with GNU Guix. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. (use-modules (guix build-system trivial) (guix packages) (gnu packages fontutils) (gnu packages apr)) (define* (fhs-union inputs #:key (name "fhs-union") (version "0.0") (system "x86_64-linux")) "Create a package housing the union of inputs." (package (name name) (version version) (source #f) (inputs inputs) (build-system trivial-build-system) (arguments `(#:system ,system #:modules ((guix build union)) #:builder (begin (use-modules (ice-9 match) (guix build union)) (match %build-inputs (((_ . directories) ...) (union-build (assoc-ref %outputs "out") directories) (format #t "\n directories: ~a\n" directories) #t))))) (home-page #f) (synopsis "Libraries used for FHS") (description "Libraries needed to build a guix container FHS.") (license #f))) ;(fhs-union (list fontconfig)) ;(fhs-union (list fontconfig) #:system "i686-linux") (fhs-union (list apr-util))
J
J
John Kehayias wrote on 21 Jan 07:54 +0100
(name . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)(address . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)
_yV8VwaAQw22nEoGIlm6a7oqlUMtT8nqReMHaxvyjLlwSqLgP5dkF0ro1t88lH9WtZt1jZv7zZXvlK2dkf46dSfbQnolV8IcbGcAl3vH8g4=@protonmail.com
Oh, and in the share/doc directory of the union:

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 expat -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/share/doc/expat/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 expat-2.4.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/share/doc/expat-2.4.1

Second link broken, first link correct, both to the replacement (2.4.3 version) store directory.
J
J
John Kehayias wrote on 22 Jan 17:56 +0100
(name . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)(address . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)
BYeMc6gGtnBoJyRsELEncbxb7IahCy3bBt_4jqcu7ElDUIP6rJ8JlCLQJCbWf_1rWk5EmUrCkJ1S-ktN91yxhJngftOzJSeMPRo2JpMxPag=@protonmail.com
I haven't had the chance to see what is happening inside union-build yet, but did confirm that propagating expat/fixed instead of expat does not have the same problem.

I tried with

(define fontconfig-fixed
(package
(inherit fontconfig)
(propagated-inputs
(modify-inputs (package-propagated-inputs fontconfig)
(replace "expat" (@@ (gnu packages xml) expat/fixed))))))

and then (fhs-union (list fontconfig-fixed)) did not have any broken links trying to go to the wrong version. Using this also works around my original problem of a multi-arch union build having collisions (so that seems to stem from whatever is happening here).
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 24 Jan 15:18 +0100
Re: bug#53406: union-build incorrectly handles grafts
(name . John Kehayias)(address . john.kehayias@protonmail.com)(address . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)
878rv5ushp.fsf@gnu.org
Hi,

John Kehayias <john.kehayias@protonmail.com> skribis:

Toggle quote (20 lines)
> If I run the attached file with guix build -f graft-test.scm and look at libexpat in the created package with, e.g.
>
> ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib/libexpat*
>
> I get
>
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/a3ixqfx1cfjgbz5gb925fv7dwy2h55gs-fhs-union-0.0/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1
>
> Note that the last link is broken: looking at this expat library (2.4.3, the replacement) it has
>
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 961 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so -> libexpat.so.1.8.3*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> libexpat.so.1.8.3*
> -r-xr-xr-x 2 root root 191K Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.3*
>
> This is why the last link from the union-build package is broken, it tries to point to libexpat.so.1.8.1 (the previous version, but in the newer version's directory).

Grafting is a pretty basic process: in this case it replaces occurrences
of /gnu/store/…-expat-2.4.1 with /gnu/store/…-expat-2.4.3, nothing more.
It cannot guess that libexpat.so.1.8.1 was renamed to libexpat.so.1.8.3
or anything like that.

Is it a problem? Normally no, because users of shared libraries don’t
refer to libraries by their fully-qualified name:

Toggle snippet (6 lines)
$ objdump -x $(guix build dbus-glib)/bin/dbus-binding-tool|grep NEED.*expat
NEEDED libexpat.so.1
$ objdump -x $(guix build dbus-glib)/bin/dbus-binding-tool|grep RUNPATH
RUNPATH /gnu/store/wwmxxlmlhwljn39z0gsj6iai3zk67a2g-dbus-glib-0.110/lib:/gnu/store/5s6iz5f777rh23q4kv8gvqrsyy61cbjh-dbus-1.12.20/lib:/gnu/store/s0w7szfsajdy6cnrz2w7z4h5spyl4aaj-expat-2.4.1/lib:/gnu/store/2fk1gz2s7ppdicynscra9b19byrrr866-glibc-2.33/lib:/gnu/store/90lbavffg0csrf208nw0ayj1bz5knl47-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/qqs98rxwjrji6aaf6dqwp7q4m545g2sn-glib-2.70.0/lib:/gnu/store/90lbavffg0csrf208nw0ayj1bz5knl47-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/10.3.0/../../..

Likewise, ‘etc/ld.so.cache’ contains a reference to ‘libexpat.so.1’, not
to ‘libexpat.so.1.8.1’.

Does that make sense? Or am I overlooking something?

Thanks,
Ludo’.
J
J
John Kehayias wrote on 25 Jan 04:22 +0100
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)(address . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)
tJNGA4veM58kh6qICZ8iQbbn0ygA7e2p04ebczPbuFjiYeYTaOsgVXEOKQVK2PQHwYbS7OPekQZV5DvcvmDyAoeaP4sO3La7gjNjIKCEsnM=@protonmail.com
Hi Ludo’,

Thanks for explaining!

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 9:18 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:

Toggle quote (20 lines)
>
> Grafting is a pretty basic process: in this case it replaces occurrences
> of /gnu/store/…-expat-2.4.1 with /gnu/store/…-expat-2.4.3, nothing more.
> It cannot guess that libexpat.so.1.8.1 was renamed to libexpat.so.1.8.3
> or anything like that.
>
> Is it a problem? Normally no, because users of shared libraries don’t
> refer to libraries by their fully-qualified name:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> $ objdump -x $(guix build dbus-glib)/bin/dbus-binding-tool|grep NEED.*expat
> NEEDED libexpat.so.1
> $ objdump -x $(guix build dbus-glib)/bin/dbus-binding-tool|grep RUNPATH
> RUNPATH /gnu/store/wwmxxlmlhwljn39z0gsj6iai3zk67a2g-dbus-glib-0.110/lib:/gnu/store/5s6iz5f777rh23q4kv8gvqrsyy61cbjh-dbus-1.12.20/lib:/gnu/store/s0w7szfsajdy6cnrz2w7z4h5spyl4aaj-expat-2.4.1/lib:/gnu/store/2fk1gz2s7ppdicynscra9b19byrrr866-glibc-2.33/lib:/gnu/store/90lbavffg0csrf208nw0ayj1bz5knl47-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib:/gnu/store/qqs98rxwjrji6aaf6dqwp7q4m545g2sn-glib-2.70.0/lib:/gnu/store/90lbavffg0csrf208nw0ayj1bz5knl47-gcc-10.3.0-lib/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/10.3.0/../../..
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> Likewise, ‘etc/ld.so.cache’ contains a reference to ‘libexpat.so.1’, not
> to ‘libexpat.so.1.8.1’.
>

(Your example output was not of a grafted libexpat in the RUNPATH, but point taken; I see the newer expat version on my (grafted) dbus-glib).

Toggle quote (3 lines)
> Does that make sense? Or am I overlooking something?
>

Yes, that makes sense, thank you for clarifying. So this is the currently expected behavior. Ideally grafting would be smarter to maybe avoid this (missing changes in e.g. version number)? But I would guess this is not something that would be expected to cause a problem for the vast majority of cases, as you explain, and adds complexity to the process.

I'm glad to hear it all works! But...

Perhaps I was too hasty in noting this "problem" which like I said was not the error I originally encountered. I was using a package that constructs both the 64- and 32-bit libraries to put in a container (say, a /lib32 and /lib64 or something similar to an FHS environment). A collision was happening between a file and directory, one being a good symlink and the other broken, rather than a "real" mismatch in file vs directory. Anyway, going back to that what I see is that one link is broken for the above reasons, but the good one is good because it is to the *ungrafted* library store path. I don't know now if these 2 things are connected other than one led me to the other, but I turn now to what demonstrates my original problem.

I don't know why this happens or if it is something in this building process that is not correct, but I did come up with a minimal example (attached). The code is a bit odd in its stripped down form, though hopefully is clear in what way this would be used to do something useful (again, like an FHS environment or other container). Apologies for the old style and lack of gexps which I'm finally getting used to. The example package just tries to make a dummy package that has, for illustration, a "/lib64" and "/lib32" which link to the respective union-build inputs (of a single library for simplicity). I don't think the actual package being made matters so much, or how it is constructed, but that two inputs are union-builds of the same library (x86_64 and i686) which should have a graft of expat. Just my guess though.

Doing:

ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib64/lib/libexpat*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1

is what we saw already: libexpat is the newer (replacement, 2.4.3) version, with the full version symlink broken since the version number is wrong. Likewise in other pieces that have the version number, like share/doc. Okay, that's expected. But now, in the i686-linux union-build input:

ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib32/lib/libexpat*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so.1*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1*

all the links are good and to the original (version 2.4.1) expat. In other words, the constructed union64 and union32 inputs (in the sample code) do not both get grafted, even though doing just the fhs-union command on it's own (not building both for another package) does graft for either architecture. At least that seems like the most obvious difference between the earlier example and this new one.

Why? Does the grafting just happen "once" somehow and misses the "same" input again (but built for different system)? Is this expected or just a weird/wrong way to do this kind of build which is causing this? I'm not sure if this is just with union-build or if it would happen just with inputs of the same library but different architectures. I didn't know how to do that quickly off hand, so I haven't tried it yet.

Thanks for taking the time to look and explain, much appreciated!

John
;;; GNU Guix --- Functional package management for GNU ;;; Copyright © 2020 pkill-9 ;;; Copyright © 2020, 2021 ison <ison@airmail.cc> ;;; Copyright © 2021 pineapples ;;; Copyright © 2021 Jean-Baptiste Volatier <jbv@pm.me> ;;; Copyright © 2021 Kozo <kozodev@runbox.com> ;;; Copyright © 2021 John Kehayias <john.kehayias@protonmail.com> ;;; ;;; This file is not part of GNU Guix. ;;; ;;; GNU Guix is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it ;;; under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by ;;; the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or (at ;;; your option) any later version. ;;; ;;; GNU Guix is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but ;;; WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of ;;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the ;;; GNU General Public License for more details. ;;; ;;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License ;;; along with GNU Guix. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. (use-modules (guix build-system trivial) (guix packages) (gnu packages fontutils) (gnu packages apr)) (define* (fhs-union inputs #:key (name "fhs-union") (version "0.0") (system "x86_64-linux")) "Create a package housing the union of inputs." (package (name name) (version version) (source #f) (inputs inputs) (build-system trivial-build-system) (arguments `(#:system ,system #:modules ((guix build union)) #:builder (begin (use-modules (ice-9 match) (guix build union)) (match %build-inputs (((_ . directories) ...) (union-build (assoc-ref %outputs "out") directories) (format #t "\n directories: ~a\n" directories)))))) (home-page #f) (synopsis "Libraries used for FHS") (description "Libraries needed to build a guix container FHS.") (license #f))) (define fontconfig-fixed (package (inherit fontconfig) (propagated-inputs (modify-inputs (package-propagated-inputs fontconfig) (replace "expat" (@@ (gnu packages xml) expat/fixed)))))) (define (container-package pkg-list) (let* ((union64 (fhs-union pkg-list #:name "fhs-union-64")) (union32 (fhs-union pkg-list #:name "fhs-union-32" #:system "i686-linux"))) (package (name "test-pkg") (version "0.0") (source #f) (inputs `(("fhs-union-64" ,union64) ("fhs-union-32" ,union32))) (build-system trivial-build-system) (arguments `(#:modules ((guix build utils)) #:builder (begin (use-modules (guix build utils)) (let* ((out (assoc-ref %outputs "out")) (lib64-target (assoc-ref %build-inputs "fhs-union-64")) (lib64-dest (string-append out "/lib64")) (lib32-target (assoc-ref %build-inputs "fhs-union-32")) (lib32-dest (string-append out "/lib32"))) (format #t "\nunion64: ~a\nunion32: ~a\n" lib64-target lib32-target) (mkdir-p (string-append out "/bin")) ; dummy dir needed to build (symlink lib64-target lib64-dest) (symlink lib32-target lib32-dest))))) (home-page #f) (synopsis #f) (description #f) (license #f)))) ;(fhs-union (list fontconfig-fixed)) ;(fhs-union (list fontconfig) #:system "i686-linux") ;(fhs-union (list fontconfig)) ;(fhs-union (list apr-util)) (container-package `(("apr-util" ,apr-util)))
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 25 Jan 14:47 +0100
(name . John Kehayias)(address . john.kehayias@protonmail.com)(address . 53406@debbugs.gnu.org)
87bl00lyf6.fsf@gnu.org
Hi John,

John Kehayias <john.kehayias@protonmail.com> skribis:

Toggle quote (2 lines)
> Yes, that makes sense, thank you for clarifying. So this is the currently expected behavior. Ideally grafting would be smarter to maybe avoid this (missing changes in e.g. version number)? But I would guess this is not something that would be expected to cause a problem for the vast majority of cases, as you explain, and adds complexity to the process.

I don’t think it can be smarter; grafting is just text substitution, it
knows nothing about the files it’s fiddling with (with the exception of
debugging sections in ELF files).

Toggle quote (24 lines)
> Perhaps I was too hasty in noting this "problem" which like I said was not the error I originally encountered. I was using a package that constructs both the 64- and 32-bit libraries to put in a container (say, a /lib32 and /lib64 or something similar to an FHS environment). A collision was happening between a file and directory, one being a good symlink and the other broken, rather than a "real" mismatch in file vs directory. Anyway, going back to that what I see is that one link is broken for the above reasons, but the good one is good because it is to the *ungrafted* library store path. I don't know now if these 2 things are connected other than one led me to the other, but I turn now to what demonstrates my original problem.
>
> I don't know why this happens or if it is something in this building process that is not correct, but I did come up with a minimal example (attached). The code is a bit odd in its stripped down form, though hopefully is clear in what way this would be used to do something useful (again, like an FHS environment or other container). Apologies for the old style and lack of gexps which I'm finally getting used to. The example package just tries to make a dummy package that has, for illustration, a "/lib64" and "/lib32" which link to the respective union-build inputs (of a single library for simplicity). I don't think the actual package being made matters so much, or how it is constructed, but that two inputs are union-builds of the same library (x86_64 and i686) which should have a graft of expat. Just my guess though.
>
> Doing:
>
> ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib64/lib/libexpat*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib64/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/2q8wwhd3prib0swky68rbx9hl0xxs6hf-expat-2.4.3/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1
>
> is what we saw already: libexpat is the newer (replacement, 2.4.3) version, with the full version symlink broken since the version number is wrong. Likewise in other pieces that have the version number, like share/doc. Okay, that's expected. But now, in the i686-linux union-build input:
>
> ls -la $(guix build -f graft-test.scm)/lib32/lib/libexpat*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.la -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 71 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 73 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so.1 -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so.1*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 77 Dec 31 1969 /gnu/store/qbh16hfdv8pnfw01k6izbs3jkji6i978-test-pkg-0.0/lib32/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1 -> /gnu/store/b0jns3vzhhpna7lim8bc3dr0payzx5yy-expat-2.4.1/lib/libexpat.so.1.8.1*
>
> all the links are good and to the original (version 2.4.1) expat. In other words, the constructed union64 and union32 inputs (in the sample code) do not both get grafted, even though doing just the fhs-union command on it's own (not building both for another package) does graft for either architecture. At least that seems like the most obvious difference between the earlier example and this new one.
>
> Why? Does the grafting just happen "once" somehow and misses the "same" input again (but built for different system)? Is this expected or just a weird/wrong way to do this kind of build which is causing this? I'm not sure if this is just with union-build or if it would happen just with inputs of the same library but different architectures. I didn't know how to do that quickly off hand, so I haven't tried it yet.

Woow, it’s a sophisticated example. :-)

I don’t actually have the Expat replacement we’re talking about so I
can’t easily test.

At first sight I’d say it should work (both lib32 and lib64 should refer
to the Expat replacement), but it could be that something somewhere
assumes all the packages are built for the system. That would need more
investigation work in (guix packages) in (guix grafts).

Thanks,
Ludo’.
?