From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id SDlgN9OJXV8jbAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:54:11 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id EP6/MdOJXV80NAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:54:11 +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 3DB4F94060E for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:54:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:57290 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI9Y-0005jZ-Ko for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:54:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40682) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI9S-0005jQ-D8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:54:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37715) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI9S-0001NW-3q for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:54:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI9S-00057V-27 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:54:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#41669: Cross-compiled powerpc64-linux bootstrap-tarballs not reproducible Resent-From: Chris Marusich Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:54:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41669 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 41669@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 41669-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41669.159996559819617 (code B ref 41669); Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:54:01 +0000 Received: (at 41669) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Sep 2020 02:53:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49261 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI8j-00056L-Qr for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:53:18 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-f67.google.com ([209.85.216.67]:51214) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kHI8i-000568-L4 for 41669@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:53:17 -0400 Received: by mail-pj1-f67.google.com with SMTP id a9so3645455pjg.1 for <41669@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 19:53:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=3v1jX2Ze1zrYhtlgur09vsciZmdynesJ+3F1pqvzW1Q=; b=pwyJ+w4cw4ts4LkxX5n71F40PRASmm3JyasSxO/6n0gxpxDjusO5RbiF0mflfPSHJj j6gRIhX8Bi1X38EHCymOFs2BPstGtc5Wnv/BUcrkf92C66Og9naxjyxPC2wOzLdAytKk qzV6DiB6Nj+DUnqp6layTDwwbB6X1YSswx9iHzRUrI3P08eBRvMk8yykJzpmHosnAX2t wsa91nn6JZYYTOiBjdIalKY0MmAcq/4oTeHeB7eGkoB5woKiTDqTdz9l0grhSNPGVuAU iYfYpg3pAeF64WDo4mwXRzy8MUGNaRIrnrHqSi4gwu9POEPkHvTGXi+Jzt91/XTPmXco ogVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=3v1jX2Ze1zrYhtlgur09vsciZmdynesJ+3F1pqvzW1Q=; b=gjXmMleyusPHTxEUjj+t9oC2K2sJ6cJN5CnUxq9l76afAqQdQF/UKSSf5iTLPdpInh 46I6q2DO/n4R9E1VHVXXwOq2RXyNXUkg4ZhNAIMM69bU3ZkDlB4q+c//0SBYr/QPB7fE om5elYU/lFmlrHr05k0HvSGPniMF97+tQ0xMC2X8tPBZqBmVKlbqZlxBP6eGvnsXC/0z HFl7M5YDCui9TjMGp6M/498m8A3/tc54eYBih12kNKXybqm2K/fobiwDh4HJS8HJ2OU5 XzQC44DjdeHFu7t395vjh7UBsCpCJbwPdvTBi2ni4Lf/4/xiJOcR7kpuG/yU1slDh2tr RUJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pNQxDX7Meqc0k+42Qd7HgfbSZHWcOycThgPu9vM8TydJq1xpj zwde/brccjO0rhSKQ7t5t/c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxgTT6HkeZqMs9PsAX31JsCetuP+piS64fbXyvOATcU2zNllOxsMboDIiVuknXdLMSiHJ73XQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3004:: with SMTP id hg4mr8182561pjb.7.1599965590589; Sat, 12 Sep 2020 19:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garuda-lan ([2601:601:9d00:688::e6b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q4sm6241268pfs.193.2020.09.12.19.53.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 12 Sep 2020 19:53:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Marusich References: <874krtnvk8.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 19:53:04 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> (Chris Marusich's message of "Wed, 03 Jun 2020 02:48:21 -0700") Message-ID: <87a6xu2xrj.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Vincent Legoll , =?UTF-8?Q?L=C3=A9o?= Le Bouter , Maxim Cournoyer 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=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=pwyJ+w4c; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=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: 3.49 X-TUID: wcbdWlHsfKxP --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, Chris Marusich writes: > If you examine the derivations and their inputs, you'll find that they > depend upon each other in the following order: > > guix build --target=3Dpowerpc64-linux-gnu -d -e '(@ (gnu packages make-bo= otstrap) %gcc-bootstrap-tarball)' > /gnu/store/pygln3lr6qbxcps3kmn3w4bc0d0nlpd3-gcc-stripped-tarball-5.5.0.drv > > guix build --target=3Dpowerpc64-linux-gnu -d -e '(@@ (gnu packages make-b= ootstrap) %gcc-stripped)' > /gnu/store/kcv3ja1rfr93hw6ly51878zjhdwpgv7z-gcc-stripped-5.5.0.drv > > guix build --target=3Dpowerpc64-linux-gnu -d -e '(@@ (gnu packages make-b= ootstrap) %gcc-static)' > /gnu/store/m9hfwppla8lph0vxa15lfkp81s2bbjjs-gcc-static-5.5.0.drv > > In other words, gcc-static-5.5.0.drv is an input of > gcc-stripped-5.5.0.drv, which is an input of > gcc-stripped-tarball-5.5.0.drv. Above, I've included example guix > commands you can use to obtain each derivation. Using "guix build > --check", I confirmed that all three of these derivations build > reproducibly on my machine. After further experimentation, I've discovered that %gcc-static, when built as shown above (without the -d option, of course), produces different output on Debian than on Fedora. Specifically, the %gcc-static output contains a file named libstdc++.a. This file is an archive file. Although its members are content-identical in the case of Fedora and Debian, the order of the members in the archive differs. Because the exact same inputs were used, it seems very likely that a difference in the Guix build environment caused the %gcc-static build logic to order the members of libstdc++.a differently. I built %gcc-static using Guix commit a02b2f8b86c0227eb69aa24b4373aef456365334. Both Debian and Fedora were x86_64-linux systems. I took the following steps to make absolutely certain that the exact same inputs were used on Debian and Fedora: =2D I provisioned two fresh EC2 instances (Debian and Fedora). =2D I installed Guix on Debian. =2D I did "guix pull" on Debian to get to the aforementioned commit. =2D I built %gcc-static on Debian as indicated above. =2D I manually copied the Guix store and the Guix database from Debian to Fedora. =2D I manually fixed up Fedora so it could run Guix (I created the guix users, added a systemd unit file, disabled selinux, etc.). =2D I manually verified the Guix version and the store contents were identical on Fedora and Debian. =2D I GC'd %gcc-static (and nothing else) on Fedora. =2D I rebuilt %gcc-static on Fedora. =2D I compared the Fedora %gcc-static output to the Debian %gcc-static output. The %gcc-static package uses GCC 5.5.0 as its source. I got a copy of the GCC 5.5.0 source code, and I looked at it. However, it's complex. I can't pinpoint where they actually build the libstdc++.a file. Can anyone point me to the code that does this in the GCC 5.5.0 source? I expected to find the logic hiding in a makefile or a configure script or something, but I haven't found it yet. Since this is an old GCC, it is possible that this was a known reproducibility bug which has since been fixed. I haven't looked into that possibility yet. If that's the case, though, it would be nice because we could simply backport a fix. =2D-=20 Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEy/WXVcvn5+/vGD+x3UCaFdgiRp0FAl9diZAACgkQ3UCaFdgi Rp0WHxAAxQnPB0Dg4GfaXrtRxOwZsqVuNlg14Qpp46YzroCJ66MyK3x4ddekFIkj p1pyyzLVF9RSvsPspf9oc0Go12JndQMOqpsAUE0rJLbVPbTlrNrkh9Jhhfar95IX p+cSNQoeuab1+nOeUH17J2TMdoxsXiwzB/4IuQHQtNLe3DVNKmIYB0tgL/L/Xasc WN0qHyNwkW/Lobs4jWNzukD3DiCv+zN0r1eDwsk02EOegW+m5yeyGMKbQUa7QCba g5vGeSi92AiqEVkuj62/IObMFVQP1rlNUBN9a3Yn8UTxW//PF9fwkJRIpSqdmGx7 VYpRJ/e4L6NT2GE91X+RPz0Pz0J9viV/lsM8esALudxQRv2/1loh4T6mubM394Cw yrhv2TxFmtlrBAEGJmIulCSOKGTJYy2bXbq2vR0sfbXZs3iKvPdY0FVyy3NShTz0 d3+Yk1T1dXw0tKQBmr04mpq+2SFvKTrHJB3FmVQa8/v+q+Q7ca10/X7NhcIgMG5H Nq7ttes7zV/zlIvWRChCKUHyefQBzN00ZQeBWfsJykko4m6W5vquOVs0Log54TrJ rgQIZAickNIQSMcG0fOVmzaj7iGf1smiaeB3bIW91Ub6FJ9NuoJuyLMFd6xmezVJ gv3wpnd6Yh9kzORQV79C14iIDUvYIOPJn3qBm1DPe5RQdlu3wn4= =OFt6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--