[PATCH] build guile-static with guile-2.0

DoneSubmitted by Efraim Flashner.
Details
3 participants
  • Efraim Flashner
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • zimoun
Owner
unassigned
Severity
normal
E
E
Efraim Flashner wrote on 12 Feb 2019 10:17
(address . guix-patches@gnu.org)(address . 34427@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190212091740.GB3284@macbook41
When experimenting I found that using guile@2.0 as a base for
guile-static, the resulting guile-static didn't segfault on the target
architecture.


--
Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
From 18035c4ec2c698f01e6324bc013a536fc036cc0a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:10:29 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: %guile-static: Build for guile@2.0.

%guile-static@2.2 currently segfaults when run.

* gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm (%guile-static): Rewrite package to
use guile@2.0 as a base.
---
gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm | 34 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

Toggle diff (82 lines)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm b/gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm
index c6002eb63a..836f24debf 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ;;; GNU Guix --- Functional package management for GNU
 ;;; Copyright © 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
-;;; Copyright © 2017 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
+;;; Copyright © 2017, 2019 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
 ;;; Copyright © 2018 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
 ;;; Copyright © 2018 Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
 ;;;
@@ -518,29 +518,29 @@ for `sh' in $PATH, and without nscd, and with static NSS modules."
   ;; .scm and .go files relative to its installation directory, rather
   ;; than in hard-coded configure-time paths.
   (let* ((patches (cons* (search-patch "guile-relocatable.patch")
-                         (search-patch "guile-2.2-default-utf8.patch")
+                         (search-patch "guile-default-utf8.patch")
                          (search-patch "guile-linux-syscalls.patch")
-                         (origin-patches (package-source guile-2.2))))
-         (source  (origin (inherit (package-source guile-2.2))
+                         (origin-patches (package-source guile-2.0))))
+         (source  (origin (inherit (package-source guile-2.0))
                     (patches patches)))
-         (guile (package (inherit guile-2.2)
-                  (name (string-append (package-name guile-2.2) "-static"))
+         (guile (package (inherit guile-2.0)
+                  (name (string-append (package-name guile-2.0) "-static"))
                   (source source)
                   (synopsis "Statically-linked and relocatable Guile")
 
                   ;; Remove the 'debug' output (see above for the reason.)
-                  (outputs (delete "debug" (package-outputs guile-2.2)))
+                  (outputs (delete "debug" (package-outputs guile-2.0)))
 
                   (inputs
                    `(("libunistring:static" ,libunistring "static")
-                     ,@(package-inputs guile-2.2)))
+                     ,@(package-inputs guile-2.0)))
 
                   (propagated-inputs
                    `(("bdw-gc" ,libgc)
                      ,@(alist-delete "bdw-gc"
-                                     (package-propagated-inputs guile-2.2))))
+                                     (package-propagated-inputs guile-2.0))))
                   (arguments
-                   (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2)
+                   (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.0)
                      ((#:configure-flags flags '())
                       ;; When `configure' checks for ltdl availability, it
                       ;; doesn't try to link using libtool, and thus fails
@@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ for `sh' in $PATH, and without nscd, and with static NSS modules."
                                (("^guile_LDFLAGS =")
                                 "guile_LDFLAGS = -all-static")
 
-                               ;; Add `-ldl' *after* libguile-2.2.la.
+                               ;; Add `-ldl' *after* libguile-2.0.la.
                                (("^guile_LDADD =(.*)$" _ ldadd)
                                 (string-append "guile_LDADD = "
                                                (string-trim-right ldadd)
@@ -591,13 +591,13 @@ for `sh' in $PATH, and without nscd, and with static NSS modules."
                 (out    (assoc-ref %outputs "out"))
                 (guile1 (string-append in "/bin/guile"))
                 (guile2 (string-append out "/bin/guile")))
-           (mkdir-p (string-append out "/share/guile/2.2"))
-           (copy-recursively (string-append in "/share/guile/2.2")
-                             (string-append out "/share/guile/2.2"))
+           (mkdir-p (string-append out "/share/guile/2.0"))
+           (copy-recursively (string-append in "/share/guile/2.0")
+                             (string-append out "/share/guile/2.0"))
 
-           (mkdir-p (string-append out "/lib/guile/2.2/ccache"))
-           (copy-recursively (string-append in "/lib/guile/2.2/ccache")
-                             (string-append out "/lib/guile/2.2/ccache"))
+           (mkdir-p (string-append out "/lib/guile/2.0/ccache"))
+           (copy-recursively (string-append in "/lib/guile/2.0/ccache")
+                             (string-append out "/lib/guile/2.0/ccache"))
 
            (mkdir (string-append out "/bin"))
            (copy-file guile1 guile2)
-- 
2.20.1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAlxijy4ACgkQQarn3Mo9
g1FRzBAApDrqkMANqwivufw3E8YzhhHi4owAMHX65UHLybOzVYJK3cMWJEZhp1pl
TOLtgKfOkv95BA4MR5Ju/DEgwyXgg9Zc2U88PmkpK/7v0MJMAWg24ZeBiZy+p6mO
hgy4F2Wz+oXKa6QsbtqWNUB/h8kS9Y/PZk2+Nk20dISwfQosrJtfZUFBPF6uh/rR
MWRTl/WziLwNIbCzaqJ5DO+qYmyJp7fM6k190vPGNIGwN1id3/bn6gjwyyiqDoHH
W7/jkt/YxLdxopEGVejFgNyjzcenWbkkCEBg3piGzQ6ZjetzpgDlKDttP5oHkCuJ
PbKVbvSfC9sH3YiQfabcBb7Hc4nzpLuEnayKdSzht98PhHV4xAEMgv5sVbJ/oIIl
4BsUk+t+b8FVNE6rHEbt8N2yYfOwbEw6wNSeYJhtcubKYmtguLo0aZzARt1Xv9sM
1LI9p+/AtjBk0CshQqaZsKnmfx60B+nzFq8TR+wkupiV5WTYDORGj2NvCR4dTQ9Q
iCYaVoa2tnn2kCqOPjxTbTXztLLi3QUZa8L2Zzq3Wb0MGie0pLXLWsd9WPhZnhNA
hkSemoVDT+0H9o1KBG4DlkWRrqEElRdaCIk3f8DrPK59nLnpnlKAAvGXIWHcEXq7
nFFMKGNRHiT+gL7//OR9Mp/Zcf9cgAzpVzzNpEzB9QQVDsQSaP0=
=Ztlx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 16 Feb 2019 17:06
(name . Efraim Flashner)(address . efraim@flashner.co.il)
87mumvhg5u.fsf@gnu.org
Hi Efraim,

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

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> When experimenting I found that using guile@2.0 as a base for
> guile-static, the resulting guile-static didn't segfault on the target
> architecture.

As discussed in https://issues.guix.info/issue/34427, I would rather
fix the segfault in 2.2 than move back to 2.0 and effectively delay the
problem.

Ludo’.
Z
Z
zimoun wrote on 12 Apr 12:10 +0200
Re: bug#34453: [PATCH] build guile-static with guile-2.0
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)
86o816394u.fsf_-_@gmail.com
Hi,

What is the status of this old patch #34453?



On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 17:06, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
Toggle quote (10 lines)
> Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:
>
>> When experimenting I found that using guile@2.0 as a base for
>> guile-static, the resulting guile-static didn't segfault on the target
>> architecture.
>
> As discussed in <https://issues.guix.info/issue/34427>, I would rather
> fix the segfault in 2.2 than move back to 2.0 and effectively delay the
> problem.

Note that #34427 is still open.


Cheers,
simon
E
E
Efraim Flashner wrote on 13 Apr 23:07 +0200
(name . zimoun)(address . zimon.toutoune@gmail.com)
Ylc7ezs6vG2ee5LE@pbp
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:10:09PM +0200, zimoun wrote:
Toggle quote (20 lines)
> Hi,
>
> What is the status of this old patch #34453?
>
> http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/34453
>
>
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 17:06, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:
> >
> >> When experimenting I found that using guile@2.0 as a base for
> >> guile-static, the resulting guile-static didn't segfault on the target
> >> architecture.
> >
> > As discussed in <https://issues.guix.info/issue/34427>, I would rather
> > fix the segfault in 2.2 than move back to 2.0 and effectively delay the
> > problem.
>
> Note that #34427 is still open.

We can probably drop it. We'll pick it back up again if/when it comes up
again.

--
Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר
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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=gEp1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Z
Z
zimoun wrote 3 days ago
(name . Efraim Flashner)(address . efraim@flashner.co.il)
86wnd794p9.fsf_-_@gmail.com
Hi,

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 00:07, Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> wrote:
Toggle quote (13 lines)
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:10:09PM +0200, zimoun wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 17:06, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>> > Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:

>> > As discussed in <https://issues.guix.info/issue/34427>, I would rather
>> > fix the segfault in 2.2 than move back to 2.0 and effectively delay the
>> > problem.
>>
>> Note that #34427 is still open.
>
> We can probably drop it. We'll pick it back up again if/when it comes up
> again.

Therefore, I am closing.


Cheers,
simon
Closed
?