From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
To: Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com>
Cc: 36747@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#36747: Official MesCC bootstrap binaries differ from my locally built ones
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 19:16:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87imqyf28l.fsf@netris.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r25mgm93.fsf@devup.no> (Marius Bakke's message of "Thu, 15 Aug 2019 23:19:20 +0200")
Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> writes:
> Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
>
>> I rebased 'wip-binaries' on top of current master (which includes the
>> recent 'staging' merge), and excluding the update of mescc-tools to the
>> git checkout.
>>
>> I built the bootstrap-tarballs for i686-linux and got the same hashes
>> that we've previously agreed on here. I used "guix download" to load
>> the new bootstrap binaries into my store, and am now testing the
>> attached draft patch to 'core-updates'.
>
> Excellent, thank you! The patches LGTM.
>
> I wonder if we should run these through a 'core-updates-next' branch to
> give ourselves a little time to bootstrap the different architectures.
>
> (also, it would be neat to get SQLite 3.29.0 in..)
>
> Thoughts? I don't have a strong opinion, so do what you think is best.
I think we should continue to treat 'core-updates' as frozen. These
slight changes to the bootstrap binaries to make them build
deterministically should almost certainly make no difference to anything
else in 'core-updates', so the only time we'll lose is the time needed
for Berlin to rebuild.
If we make any additional changes to 'core-updates', such as updating
SQLite or adding more architectures, it will likely cause additional
problems that need to be debugged. This 'core-updates' cycle has
already taken too long, IMO.
Any other opinions?
Thanks,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-15 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-20 22:43 bug#36747: Official MesCC bootstrap binaries differ from my locally built ones Mark H Weaver
2019-07-21 13:34 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-07-22 0:56 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-22 6:18 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-07-22 6:26 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-07-22 8:26 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-07-22 8:31 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-22 17:41 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-07-23 5:42 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-23 6:28 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-08-12 0:21 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-12 4:11 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-23 10:03 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-12 7:08 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-12 9:01 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-08-13 6:42 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-13 10:17 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2019-08-14 15:03 ` Marius Bakke
2019-08-14 17:29 ` Marius Bakke
2019-08-14 18:35 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-14 18:43 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-14 19:56 ` Marius Bakke
2019-08-14 20:43 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-15 19:44 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-15 21:19 ` Marius Bakke
2019-08-15 23:16 ` Mark H Weaver [this message]
2019-08-15 20:56 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-16 7:42 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-17 16:49 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-16 10:49 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-16 16:59 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-17 21:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-18 1:17 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-18 9:26 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-20 18:40 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-21 20:15 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-21 21:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-21 22:57 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-22 10:09 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-24 13:31 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-24 20:34 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-26 8:25 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-26 18:36 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-27 9:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-29 22:28 ` Bengt Richter
2019-08-27 3:58 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-27 9:40 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-27 14:27 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-27 16:04 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-27 16:46 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-28 0:55 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-28 22:12 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-29 5:46 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2019-08-29 6:32 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2019-08-29 19:28 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-29 23:23 ` Ludovic Courtès
2019-08-30 19:52 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-08-31 12:44 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87imqyf28l.fsf@netris.org \
--to=mhw@netris.org \
--cc=36747@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=mbakke@fastmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).