From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id qMQEB6ZJYV8iagAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:09:26 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id 4NFHAaZJYV84QQAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:09:26 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E6729400D3 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:45886 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK4i-0007Jy-4Z for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:09:24 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35990) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK2Q-0004uW-2x for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:07:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49325) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK2P-0005dH-Ob for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:07:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK2P-0008WB-IH for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:07:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#43344: "basic" system tests fail (and all the other ones) on guix master Resent-From: Leo Famulari Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:07:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43344 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Mark H Weaver Received: via spool by 43344-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43344.160021120732723 (code B ref 43344); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:07:01 +0000 Received: (at 43344) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Sep 2020 23:06:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60871 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK2A-0008Vj-VH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:47 -0400 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:56919) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIK29-0008VX-6N for 43344@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:45 -0400 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2170E5C00C9; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=pZvKcmvUfCVVzKbMwSIeMNkm SEJjfxUAX/EdXkwb2zU=; b=nJogZ4y5eWqYcOLnjLrgQa2aHPkiRwtqL7SZfuM9 3pVH0rWPT3DYWF9n4UpeVSbIK1CLhZZUNao6O2nuX/KP3tqTtGIdXO2eYpfRzKb3 wsAkbLD5TxEoqEIcJb3Am2VSi54ky5NQKUqMsfz7z6w9g8tpWi7glSYrPF8WINL/ O70= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=pZvKcm vUfCVVzKbMwSIeMNkmSEJjfxUAX/EdXkwb2zU=; b=jbJ8wkRW51VxAXd6FNBJyX gY6clgnBvHeihBEyhnNBfcENXh2UPfdifoZHgjOXE9rmptf39sX6yuJ7tm7VImC7 98LvHbRCgVjUy7WfpG04q1G1qicRbTf4u7t5yvWtB2WCLkimbc4FhCxT7zGpOWgb Z7842EJqPQ/emTDd62SIPB2S6E0WsZrZiK20/g89KRBNH4QOiH0uSIE+4oRkDWhI a2YzpfMiszk0Spy+vis5E0oMuWdfQ1xZMzC3QeafAwWhPubMvvDplh88TGZUQQUR xU7LtCMVzGyT4P+vpYf1iBzfpjL5S4dX97qHY9Zhz+O4m/UId937l/CKckT2jTGg == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrtddugddutdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepnfgvohcuhfgr mhhulhgrrhhiuceolhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepueekkedtffdvtddugeejgedtvefhueefiedvjeeitdeigedtveejvdejheffvefg necukfhppeejfedrudeguddruddvjedrudegieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtne curfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgv X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (c-73-141-127-146.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [73.141.127.146]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6C6CE328005A; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:06:28 -0400 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: <20200915230628.GA20807@jasmine.lan> References: <20200911195058.6dc013b4@scratchpost.org> <877dsw7alf.fsf@gnu.org> <20200914183037.624cc347@scratchpost.org> <87y2laactz.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y2laactz.fsf@netris.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mathieu Othacehe , 43344@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=famulari.name header.s=mesmtp header.b=nJogZ4y5; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b=jbJ8wkRW; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.01 X-TUID: pJ8oRuAerhtC On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 06:34:21PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > That's useful information, but we should not stay frozen on the 5.8.7 > kernel for much longer. 5.8.8 contains many bug fixes, some of which > might fix potentially exploitable flaws. > > It would be useful to know if this problem still occurs with 5.8.9, > which has since come out. If so, we should do a bisection between 5.8.7 > and 5.8.8 to find out which upstream commit introduced the problem. > > Would anyone like to investigate this further? I will try to reproduce the bug with 5.8.9 now. I will try the bisection if time permits.