From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Sep 06 09:41:50 2019 Received: (at 36685) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Sep 2019 13:41:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36559 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i6EUn-00079g-Sx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 09:41:50 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f51.google.com ([209.85.208.51]:41295) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i6EUm-00079U-Uh for 36685@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 09:41:49 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f51.google.com with SMTP id z9so6325398edq.8 for <36685@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 06:41:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zjEyex/O1ijjWGrvjBtto4DYWqdMudzPg6ttfVJ1NLM=; b=RGVNB2a+VOzNN8lswQI9dEAqi54DAJ1GcSjymZx/GJAwwTpsBAQg01cpbfbrWCdaKm ePOiP/Vv1vrPBTHze07CXxNglAoMbIxtwaGAV6IVM0sWmE1tPAPoDFzf+0fqT/1p4gPf eOy10kgpJshm7DeUBhpqbzWrLANDKmI2uWhHJ2H44qe2yhINAJVoO7hgxFM3BHnmEHjx dWuvtzwiCQDs31Tn2CZhOo+F0mo42YCAV9kP0i/UmfUM3dzSbCAcQpME3UXR4P0TOIvf K3j2p7C1WRtBTzU91GF+T+6JF1xUpBtM2AjErz5kKPfVVhMRW+CVv9l4IvTQAnhZ0Mqt 7ZLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zjEyex/O1ijjWGrvjBtto4DYWqdMudzPg6ttfVJ1NLM=; b=QjB+sK9UOyuRHT+BoY2qZWK2S5RjDDNRhx6b+YvOtGvbk7bTfv3S0SDbFK3JM6nHeK pLZCLxi/f5cf9w8R27XdAorubisHMwtgiOvgn9MW+7KPkvWHprt0XUMOVK5CSzLomRN+ aOOjhNzsUU1wWPBOyC+uaMJzDN0vfqcRjNWGclK/IN82Vy6bDFrCJeyHB38Ao/amIYPO tSQUqEg5YWyvovgpt2rBqCuWvZ1UBiKC54gcffPZpZmES6g70XsXwqV+0py8AdYiq0ZE 4owMqwslxx2IvIqcIiaJ4blq2YRkVy6JzqBSYBLKL26ejCsHfXisDERjUPxlY4d2CrwV 8JfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUsSMwhVQETMPfODq38r6yh6MXDelux34W/tLk09pAev87kFQiM cJKZ1anKl6Aln7kD6cceOefZHxz/5WXjRwFX/Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw0WUvLkdT5cifD7UHG5J1waYJy2j+vh2M4hBt311J8i9lpo1oDhkjkVyx6atyh1o/b4f1MyIHkFhFj87pcetA= X-Received: by 2002:a50:8961:: with SMTP id f30mr9587795edf.144.1567777303012; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 06:41:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8736j61n57.fsf@gmail.com> <87o91ugdot.fsf@elephly.net> <87ftn5gjzw.fsf@elephly.net> <871ryogu6j.fsf@elephly.net> <87r26nfwes.fsf@elephly.net> <87a7dafntp.fsf@elephly.net> <878ssufajf.fsf@elephly.net> <875znyf0mr.fsf@elephly.net> <87zhl9drm6.fsf@elephly.net> <20190720110612.3f33171f@sybil.lepiller.eu> <87sgr0e7ot.fsf@elephly.net> <87muh7eid5.fsf@elephly.net> <87sgqv9m61.fsf@elephly.net> <87v9u5ee6n.fsf@elephly.net> In-Reply-To: <87v9u5ee6n.fsf@elephly.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:41:29 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#36685: ant-bootstrap fails on core-updates (409 dependents) To: Ricardo Wurmus Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003baa5e0591e299ef" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 36685 Cc: Guix-devel , 36685@debbugs.gnu.org, Julien Lepiller X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --0000000000003baa5e0591e299ef Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ricardo Wurmus ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2019. szep= t. 6., P=C3=A9n 15:40): > > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > > >>> So, with the following change I was able to build all the way up to t= he > >>> latest openjdk. Should we use it despite the introduction of a memor= y > >>> leak in a bootstrap JVM? Can we make the patch smaller (fewer uses o= f > >>> glibc 2.28 or gcc-5)? > >>> > >>> What do you think? > >>> > >> > >> I will have a look at reducing the patch later today. I will report ba= ck > >> tomorrow morning with the results. > > > > Did you have any luck with this? > > We should decide soon, because core-updates is about to be merged > (finally!) =E2=80=93 any objections to my earlier patch? > No objection from here. > > -- > Ricardo > g_bor > --0000000000003baa5e0591e299ef Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2019. szept. 6.,= P=C3=A9n 15:40):

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

>>> So, with the following change I was able to build all the way = up to the
>>> latest openjdk.=C2=A0 Should we use it despite the introductio= n of a memory
>>> leak in a bootstrap JVM?=C2=A0 Can we make the patch smaller (= fewer uses of
>>> glibc 2.28 or gcc-5)?
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>
>> I will have a look at reducing the patch later today. I will repor= t back
>> tomorrow morning with the results.
>
> Did you have any luck with this?

We should decide soon, because core-updates is about to be merged
(finally!) =E2=80=93 any objections to my earlier patch?

No objection from h= ere.

--
Ricardo
g_bor
--0000000000003baa5e0591e299ef--