Request for merging "core-packages-team" branch

  • Open
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
7 participants
  • Andreas Enge
  • ???
  • Janneke Nieuwenhuizen
  • Liliana Marie Prikler
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Christopher Baines
  • Z572
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen
Severity
normal
Blocked by
J
J
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote on 12 Jan 16:32 +0100
(address . guix-patches@gnu.org)
87jzb0dp41.fsf@gnu.org
Hi!

Cuirass says we're at 81% success rate for i686-linux and x86_64-linux,
and possibly my #74676, meant as an old style "please help with the
gcc-14 transition", should have been named "Request for merging" already
anyway. Hard to keep up with all the changes but more formality is a
good thing I guess :)

Greetings,
Janneke

--
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com| Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
J
J
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote on 12 Jan 16:37 +0100
Re: bug#75517: Request for merging core-packages-team branch
(address . 75517-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
87ed18dow8.fsf_-_@gnu.org
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen writes:

Closing this bug with wrong subject (missing double quotes around branch name).

--
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com| Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 18 Jan 17:32 +0100
Re: bug#75518: Request for merging "core-packages-team" branch
(name . Janneke Nieuwenhuizen)(address . janneke@gnu.org)
8734hgulpy.fsf@gnu.org
Hello!

Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> skribis:

Toggle quote (6 lines)
> Cuirass says we're at 81% success rate for i686-linux and x86_64-linux,
> and possibly my #74676, meant as an old style "please help with the
> gcc-14 transition", should have been named "Request for merging" already
> anyway. Hard to keep up with all the changes but more formality is a
> good thing I guess :)

I’m testing the patch below to upgrade glibc to 2.40 (I’m at
‘gcc-mesboot-4.9.4’ so there are still quite a few hours before I get
around to building glibc).

I think we must upgrade glibc in this branch because (1) we want to get
rid of this graft and more generally get the latest fixes, and (2) we
cannot just ungraft since the graft uses ‘git-fetch’, which cannot be
relied on in ‘commencement.scm’ (we still assume that
‘builtin:git-download’ may be unavailable, and when it’s unavailable, we
have a circular dependency).

Thoughts?

Ludo’.
Attachment: file
J
J
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote on 18 Jan 17:49 +0100
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
878qr8awy6.fsf@gnu.org
Ludovic Courtès writes:

Hi!

Toggle quote (12 lines)
> Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> skribis:
>
>> Cuirass says we're at 81% success rate for i686-linux and x86_64-linux,
>> and possibly my #74676, meant as an old style "please help with the
>> gcc-14 transition", should have been named "Request for merging" already
>> anyway. Hard to keep up with all the changes but more formality is a
>> good thing I guess :)
>
> I’m testing the patch below to upgrade glibc to 2.40 (I’m at
> ‘gcc-mesboot-4.9.4’ so there are still quite a few hours before I get
> around to building glibc).

Oh, I didn't realise 2.40 was out already!

Toggle quote (9 lines)
> I think we must upgrade glibc in this branch because (1) we want to get
> rid of this graft and more generally get the latest fixes, and (2) we
> cannot just ungraft since the graft uses ‘git-fetch’, which cannot be
> relied on in ‘commencement.scm’ (we still assume that
> ‘builtin:git-download’ may be unavailable, and when it’s unavailable, we
> have a circular dependency).
>
> Thoughts?

That would be lovely, especially if it builds :)

Greetings,
Janneke

--
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com| Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 20 Jan 00:39 +0100
(name . Janneke Nieuwenhuizen)(address . janneke@gnu.org)
87y0z6ml02.fsf_-_@gnu.org
Hello,

Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> skribis:

Toggle quote (2 lines)
> That would be lovely, especially if it builds :)

It actually does! :-) I went a bit further and tried “guix build
coreutils”. It’s close to completion right now, but I’m going to bed.

I’m confident: unlike previous upgrades, there are no major deprecations
like the removal of Sun RPC, libutil.so, libcrypt.so, etc. (there’s not
much left to remove :-)).

So, pushed. The one thing that still needs to be tested is
(cross-)compilation to GNU/Hurd. There are probably patches that can be
dropped there.

Thanks,
Ludo’.
?
Re: [bug#75518] Request for merging "core-packages-team" branch
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
87frkzl4q5.fsf@envs.net
Hello, I just merged 'xorg-updates', now this is the next in the queue.
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote 4 days ago
control message for bug #75518
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
877c636r2f.fsf@gnu.org
block 75518 by 75658
quit
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote 4 days ago
Re: bug#75676: Request for merging "gnome-team" branch
(name . Liliana Marie Prikler)(address . liliana.prikler@gmail.com)
8734gr6ost.fsf@gnu.org
Hi Liliana,

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> skribis:

Toggle quote (6 lines)
> with most of its packages bumped to 46 and 65% substitute availability
> (same as master), I think gnome-team is on a good track to be merged
> eventually. At the same time 65% isn't *that* high and there are other
> branches to merge before that, so I'd like our collective intelligence
> to help contributing fixes for various bugs, non-x86 arches, the usual.

“core-packages-team” is officially next in queue, before “gnome-team”:


However, since that branch is not ready, I would suggest letting you go
first, as was just discussed on IRC, unless you’re not ready to merge it
in the coming days.

Ludo’.
A
A
Andreas Enge wrote 4 days ago
Builds
Z6TlNUp8UzI0XU6k@jurong
Hello,

I went up to "guix build mpc" in this branch, with success; and the
resulting library is linked with glibc-2.40.

So I did not see the non-deterministic gnash error:
and feel like we could merge after cleaning up the last two commits.

Is there anything else I could check?

Andreas
L
L
Liliana Marie Prikler wrote 4 days ago
Re: bug#75676: Request for merging "gnome-team" branch
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
3d4c2e1068521e1338e4b101d7ad4c50d3ac34db.camel@gmail.com
Hi Ludo’

Am Donnerstag, dem 06.02.2025 um 17:06 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
Toggle quote (19 lines)
> Hi Liliana,
>
> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> skribis:
>
> > with most of its packages bumped to 46 and 65% substitute
> > availability (same as master), I think gnome-team is on a good
> > track to be merged eventually.  At the same time 65% isn't *that*
> > high and there are other branches to merge before that, so I'd like
> > our collective intelligence to help contributing fixes for various
> > bugs, non-x86 arches, the usual.
>
> “core-packages-team” is officially next in queue, before “gnome-
> team”:
>
>   https://qa.guix.gnu.org/
>
> However, since that branch is not ready, I would suggest letting you
> go first, as was just discussed on IRC, unless you’re not ready to
> merge it in the coming days.
It's a tough call. QA looks red for gnome-team on everything but
x86_64 [1] and I will be away for a few days starting tomorrow with no
access to my commit machine. We could still merge today and fix the
breakages later, but I fully understand if that's not what we want.

Cheers

A
A
Andreas Enge wrote 3 days ago
Re: Builds
Z6ZBqbOm3rJXNCUD@jurong
Hello,

just another data point, I managed to "guix build mpc" with
Zheng Junjie's added commits, again without any gash problems.

If we push, we should reorder the commits and un-DRAFT the ones marked
as in the works.

Andreas
Z
Z
Z572 wrote 3 days ago
Re: [bug#75518] Builds
(name . Andreas Enge)(address . andreas@enge.fr)
87seopr6eh.fsf@z572.online
Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

Toggle quote (8 lines)
> Hello,
>
> just another data point, I managed to "guix build mpc" with
> Zheng Junjie's added commits, again without any gash problems.
>
> If we push, we should reorder the commits and un-DRAFT the ones marked
> as in the works.


During the irc discussions, we decided to let gnome-team merge first

Toggle quote (2 lines)
>
> Andreas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=XZzb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

C
C
Christopher Baines wrote 2 days ago
Re: [bug#75676] Request for merging "gnome-team" branch
(address . control@debbbugs.gnu.org)
87pljslh7l.fsf@cbaines.net
# block the core-packages-team merge by gnome-team
block 75518 by 75676
thanks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=fsDA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

C
C
Christopher Baines wrote 2 days ago
(no subject)
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87lduglgwy.fsf@cbaines.net
# block the core-packages-team merge by gnome-team
block 75518 by 75676
thanks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmenWB1fFIAAAAAALgAo
aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF
ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh
aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xfu7xAAlHlh/xZ6p2GDTkpDQlLMJ1XNiEUkEM1L
DFIU+03XvlO5oZg/xEp/0FEACSaaGbcdifSsl/ouHJV0NCEoQTrLcJizEMIqcmVp
TU3DOyA9hnfNf9XuzpUEJMh262vvosAXWzj0FjIgeE8ifNFzc3zrDBU+e64h+cgT
00gAUdZ7Dtmbo91A7lCfqDQC8gyuDHDdU1n0LAI2xPY768UuPgaNXagcTLIME5hQ
nxugwdZS7BovjG1HK3pqIW32RGtN8xODw3mvJe9gd77zBHejmQ4StSELI4SYcTId
8GZOxsPYeYXLAwJwTG/Qz94+4vPH2i2Vp0iho0bEATDQhXhtPkb0Wq/uCgInE6ni
7YeZ6ssOGwYZcXWYgQMVDMNp8SOWwHJN42IEjrpKIJFIxJyLx3qGr7TbL6B6NHxc
jiNpU1yPfCzDTtvvOy+xKTZi6ezTzmxsM257Qr86DgOmKNyokWN13u3xIELKtdAz
Molh5rB7kAaFzbT2G+V3VJxzRNaosakqCSKTsv29pGdnYsaXTL2/++12+2GaIWLF
ZsM1aoXRgbIJPARLuEdzIap75vzx3kMAFvjLCu9m+hkR5hKrYxsxbbqOP4UfaEnC
3DHYhvKjJ2kbePaEmm+3tP1J45ijuInhY8u2hu5tDs4lsDmVn8M9vGVk+llxaY6M
ZRBkDAIoSZc=
=TKou
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote 32 hours ago
Re: [bug#75518] Builds
(name . Z572)(address . z572@z572.online)
87cyfrtlqh.fsf@gnu.org
Hi,

Z572 <z572@z572.online> skribis:

Toggle quote (15 lines)
> Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> just another data point, I managed to "guix build mpc" with
>> Zheng Junjie's added commits, again without any gash problems.
>>
>> If we push, we should reorder the commits and un-DRAFT the ones marked
>> as in the works.
>
> see https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2025-02-06.log#160426 and
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/75676#1
>
> During the irc discussions, we decided to let gnome-team merge first

I’ve also been looking at the Gash issue, to no avail so far. But I
think it would be bad to ignore it as it could come to haunt us later.

Ludo’.
A
A
Andreas Enge wrote 26 hours ago
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
Z6jibawZRNMt4GGV@jurong
Am Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 12:12:54PM +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
Toggle quote (3 lines)
> I’ve also been looking at the Gash issue, to no avail so far. But I
> think it would be bad to ignore it as it could come to haunt us later.

Well, I have once again built out this branch up to mpc, and still not
seen the issue. So from my point of view, it is unreproducible to the
point of apparently not occurring in my setting :)

Andreas
?
Your comment

Commenting via the web interface is currently disabled.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 75518@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 75518
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