From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 29 03:46:01 2021 Received: (at 46212) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Mar 2021 07:46:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47725 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lQmb2-0004Z2-Kb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:46:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35794) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lQmaz-0004Yo-Rv for 46212@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:45:59 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39307) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQmau-0005ai-12; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:45:52 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:f8a9:75d0:2054:75c6] (port=37866 helo=cervin) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lQmat-0006mA-DK; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:45:51 -0400 From: Mathieu Othacehe To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: bug#46212: ci.guix.gnu.org narinfos with excessive NarSize References: <87zh0pf9ip.fsf@cbaines.net> <87r1lzftnx.fsf@cbaines.net> <874kh43725.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnu01rq6.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 09:45:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87wnu01rq6.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sun, 21 Mar 2021 15:55:29 +0100") Message-ID: <8735we2yj5.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46212 Cc: 46212@debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines 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: -1.7 (-) Hey, > Could it be that the bug was fixed in the meantime? Or that this one > was, say, built directly via Guix whereas the other one was built > through Cuirass? Mystery! That's strange. There's nothing really special about how Cuirass builds its stuff. It's a plain "build-derivations" call in the "cuirass remote-worker" process. This process only builds stuff and report it using (simple-zmq). A memory corruption in that module also seems unlikely, as there are almost 30 instances of this process running nicely for days. Thanks, Mathieu