From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pierre Langlois Subject: bug#37593: [core-updates] Linux-Libre fails to build on aarch64-linux Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 23:09:48 +0100 Message-ID: <87a7ain6j7.fsf@gmx.com> References: <877e5m98nv.fsf@devup.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42496) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmpr-0005hB-LT for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:11:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmpq-00029j-CQ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:11:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57883) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmpq-00029L-9l for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:11:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmpp-0002Iq-Mp for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:11:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42435) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmp4-0005VD-0b for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:10:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmp2-0001ed-RV for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:10:13 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:34403) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFmp2-0001d7-Du for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:10:12 -0400 In-reply-to: <877e5m98nv.fsf@devup.no> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: 37593@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Marius, Marius Bakke writes: > Berlin fails to build "linux-libre" for AArch64 on the 'core-updates' > branch. Here is a recent attempt: > > https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/1758844/details > > Log file for the latest build: > > https://ci.guix.gnu.org/log/aq2rnrmjsgnyk8vmsm7aa3mgdj39dcwh-linux-libre-5.2.17.drv > > This seems to be the salient bit: > > CC [M] arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.o > In file included from /gnu/store/nr1aw4i32h7rmxwmq7d2da0mwcwg551j-glibc-2.29/include/stdint.h:34:0, > from /gnu/store/yckkivhynk4hjcr0iry9vbcyc0lqqnxj-gcc-7.4.0-lib/lib/gcc/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/7.4.0/include/arm_neon.h:33, > from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/neon-intrinsics.h:33, > from arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.c:11: > /gnu/store/nr1aw4i32h7rmxwmq7d2da0mwcwg551j-glibc-2.29/include/bits/stdint-intn.h:27:19: error: conflicting types for 'int64_t' > typedef __int64_t int64_t; > ^~~~~~~ > In file included from ./include/linux/list.h:5:0, > from ./include/linux/module.h:9, > from arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.c:10: > ./include/linux/types.h:114:15: note: previous declaration of 'int64_t' was here > typedef s64 int64_t; > ^~~~~~~ > In file included from /gnu/store/nr1aw4i32h7rmxwmq7d2da0mwcwg551j-glibc-2.29/include/stdint.h:37:0, > from /gnu/store/yckkivhynk4hjcr0iry9vbcyc0lqqnxj-gcc-7.4.0-lib/lib/gcc/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/7.4.0/include/arm_neon.h:33, > from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/neon-intrinsics.h:33, > from arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.c:11: > /gnu/store/nr1aw4i32h7rmxwmq7d2da0mwcwg551j-glibc-2.29/include/bits/stdint-uintn.h:27:20: error: conflicting types for 'uint64_t' > typedef __uint64_t uint64_t; > ^~~~~~~~ > In file included from ./include/linux/list.h:5:0, > from ./include/linux/module.h:9, > from arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.c:10: > ./include/linux/types.h:112:15: note: previous declaration of 'uint64_t' was here > typedef u64 uint64_t; > ^~~~~~~~ > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:285: arch/arm64/lib/xor-neon.o] Error 1 > make: *** [Makefile:1073: arch/arm64/lib] Error 2 > make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > Not sure what's going on here. Ideas? Ha, that looks familiar, the same issue happened back in July: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00175.html I don't think we worked out what was the problem exactly though :-/ Thanks, Pierre