Missing Disarchive info for isl-0.19.tar.bz2

  • Open
  • quality assurance status badge
2 participants
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Timothy Sample
Submitted by
Ludovic Courtès
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 7 Mar 13:27 +0100
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)

We have an empty Disarchive spec here:

This is for isl-0.19.tar.bz2, a dependency of GCC in Guix v1.0.0, which
can be built with

Fortunately, that tarball is still available at
(I’ve now copied it to ci.guix.gnu.org).


Timothy Sample wrote on 22 Mar 23:53 +0100
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludovic.courtes@inria.fr)(address . 69609@debbugs.gnu.org)

Ludovic Courtès <ludovic.courtes@inria.fr> writes:

Toggle quote (7 lines)
> We have an empty Disarchive spec here:
> https://disarchive.ngyro.com/sha256/d59726f34f7852a081fbd3defd1ab2136f174110fc2e0c8d10bb122173fa9ed8
> https://disarchive.guix.gnu.org/sha256/d59726f34f7852a081fbd3defd1ab2136f174110fc2e0c8d10bb122173fa9ed8
> Thoughts?

This is due to a bug that is fixed as of Disarchive 0.6.0 (see the NEWS
file or commit c669e1c for details). This bug interacted badly with the
PoG code resulting in a handful of corrupt Disarchive specifications.

I found four corrupt specifications in the set that we synchronized:

• 095f4b5 isl-0.11.1.tar.bz2
• 6b8b0fd isl-0.18.tar.bz2
• 881f238 libass-0.14.0.tar.xz
• d59726f isl-0.19.tar.bz2

The three isl ones are due to a typo in the Guix source. The libass one
likely comes from when I was testing XZ support.

I have three more corrupt bzip2 specifications from the set that we have
not yet synchronized:

• 3f66bce mingw-w64-v11.0.1.tar.bz2
• 0cd846c nsis-3.09-src.tar.bz2
• bd0ea16 mingw-w64-v11.0.0.tar.bz2

They are likely due to testing bzip2 support.

Of all of these, Disarchive can only produce specifications for the isl
sources. I’ve attached their specifications; they should replace the
corrupt ones. The corrupt libass specification should be deleted.

If possible, could you run something like

find . -exec zgrep -H -F '(version 0) #f' '{}' ';'

over the specifications at disarchive.guix.gnu.org? If there are more
broken specifications (unlikely but possible) we should fix them. Just
post the hashes (i.e. filenames) of any that you find, and I can
investigate further.

-- Tim
Your comment

Commenting via the web interface is currently disabled.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 69609@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 69609
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