From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Maxim Cournoyer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Bug#1064998: guile-lib: broken package when cross building Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 22:29:26 -0500 Message-ID: <87msrghu21.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20240228132207.GA3451424@subdivi.de> <87o7bxbg5x.fsf@contorta> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9065"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: David Pirotte , Helmut Grohne , 1064998@bugs.debian.org, guile-devel@gnu.org To: Vagrant Cascadian Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 03 04:29:46 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rgcXq-0002Eh-Hw for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2024 04:29:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rgcXd-0005cl-Ba; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 22:29:33 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rgcXb-0005cY-33 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 22:29:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rgcXZ-0007DI-Cy for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 22:29:30 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-690105304b4so19654016d6.3 for ; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 19:29:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1709436568; x=1710041368; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8C3O8sZyIdwzJ73TQCGBva9H6Hem7KYv8zB47NIIpIY=; b=QUOPYwBdr0ML2Z/KoHYUnuZdMnYVz70JULhgtQdevCyyEBwu5vt43XoEO/aOPLTJJ/ As+HLGL7nsPCizSfCEvMNvDrp05M/hAg7ZE4jV0PmUkejc9p1VSHkYD+I9ZXi6Tt0aD3 /FJZ4PjR8ZNzVrXOdekgR3F0nS3ADabyGsVd7WIvDzCpeBK86T/exGpOXjwlCLzj8yT0 aZ07bnmpvSF1fCHn+FOP/wJpPaP20nWr2LyQ7vVdGGkfE7A9b3kgIo2ZJlCJdKMGKdZO kLAHn1HuRMpDcJPZtGDnBI/8kjsJ+1ptf81ywYg5wOYgozWaQ2mUwSMkjVC/ZbhH4VVW orFw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709436568; x=1710041368; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=8C3O8sZyIdwzJ73TQCGBva9H6Hem7KYv8zB47NIIpIY=; b=oUasNd4/OLjkPMfvoXXs3yHvzSVqrW5QQJfttu/ERHY/Bof6UKjRUUWTyGYflnj/km +bEvv3AhcNga94Ns/uC+fyFqdrfnIh14/hEbCProkmYikYFtaVhN6fRvoSW0J8Qu+9Bp +TzZ4PS/SsU9m8BEKZpMu++X1KrKLKFuCQdaqSkjoZw7ZCuHpshapGhBG+iwdDncVp37 hin4y4jFEfaE+CSF080Jdy1RZTqoD5/AAb++t0K7coDj0EGplsRTt017MvQz/LebaDCA 27IEXTUr/2xrWbzR2GEYBxbGpiLECJjc8+sKOT95yuWkyb5meL0OfyrQz9pZiy5508HU zQ2A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXjUgp8RiX/htyxseU6KP7gAu2KoOJtbgf7xE9ZxkVcLgQvksvZMDp+h1CxqmkatI4c09AT2d26vmxrFbsDEzbF7L5V X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxsRvBMjiaugh8TkEX9x40eKIK2oSrVS0HpGVsih8rElxhHSnUA IJ+CrwG0KDr6LKcAY5FmrPyD6i5gs+da7523kBHBRJQFjNHYetDygfaYJovI X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGHyFxsSD4yysi2kbUpgpaN2AtobBnsSKu26JlEOSNVccoCv4jGBHyulun2uHeUkFMiSTJhRw== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:c3cb:0:b0:690:5874:af7 with SMTP id p11-20020a0cc3cb000000b0069058740af7mr5896239qvi.38.1709436567717; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 19:29:27 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from hurd (dsl-158-205.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.158.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id qq3-20020a0562142c0300b0068f11430971sm3643058qvb.35.2024.03.02.19.29.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 02 Mar 2024 19:29:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87o7bxbg5x.fsf@contorta> (Vagrant Cascadian's message of "Fri, 01 Mar 2024 17:01:30 -0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d; envelope-from=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com; helo=mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.devel:22335 Archived-At: Hi Vagrant, +CC David, which maintains Guile-Lib. Vagrant Cascadian writes: > Forwarding this upstream, originally submitted in the Debian bug > tracking system at: > > https://bugs.debian.org/1064998 > > On 2024-02-28, Helmut Grohne wrote: >> guile-lib actually does cross build, but we still track it as cross >> build failure, because the resulting package contains a build >> architecture multiarch tuple and that trips post-build sanity checks. >> >> The root cause of the failure lies in the way the ccache directory is >> determined. There are actually several ways this is being done during >> configure - some of which work correctly - and ultimately, the last >> attempt using GUILE_SITE_CCACHE_DIR gets to set the value wrongly. >> Surprisingly, there already is a more complete and working >> implementation GUILE_SITE_DIR and simply reusing that makes it compute >> the ccache directory correctly. Is the attached patch acceptable? >> >> Helmut >> --- guile-lib-0.2.7.orig/m4/guile-ext.m4 >> +++ guile-lib-0.2.7/m4/guile-ext.m4 >> @@ -63,12 +63,4 @@ >> # The variable is marked for substitution, as by @code{AC_SUBST}. >> # >> AC_DEFUN([GUILE_SITE_CCACHE_DIR], >> - [AC_REQUIRE([GUILE_PROGS]) >> - AC_MSG_CHECKING(for Guile site ccache directory) >> - GUILE_SITE_CCACHE=`$GUILE -c "(display (%site-ccache-dir))"` >> - if test "$GUILE_SITE_CCACHE" = ""; then >> - AC_MSG_FAILURE(site ccache dir not found) >> - fi >> - AC_MSG_RESULT($GUILE_SITE_CCACHE) >> - AC_SUBST(GUILE_SITE_CCACHE) >> - ]) >> + [AC_REQUIRE([GUILE_SITE_DIR])]) > > Would the guile-lib developers consider merging this? Are there any > use-cases where this is inappropriate? This looks reasonable to me. If I understand correctly, it makes use of the guile.m4 already provided macro (GUILE_SITE_DIR) instead of (poorly) implementing it as 'guile -c "(display (%site-ccache-dir))"'. -- Thanks, Maxim