* bug#28211: Grafting fails for latest Go release candidate
[not found] ` <87wp5v2ylv.fsf@fastmail.com>
@ 2017-08-23 22:53 ` Ludovic Courtès
[not found] ` <87lgm9j3q9.fsf@gnu.org>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-08-23 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marius Bakke; +Cc: Andy Wingo, guix-devel, 28211
Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> skribis:
> Most likely just lucky, new grafting failure today.
>
> I've noticed they are more likely to occur when the host system is busy.
> Grafting a large package such as 'texlive' is almost guaranteed to fail
> on a fully-utilized machine.
>
> Maybe we should switch back to 2.0 for the time being?
Yes, done: <https://bugs.gnu.org/28211>.
I took a look: the code in (guix build graft) is multi-threaded but
there’s no shared state among threads (except for the current
output/error ports, which may partly explain the error messages that
suggest memory corruption.) So it may be that the problem is in
libguile.
Ludo’.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* bug#28211: Grafting fails for latest Go release candidate
[not found] ` <87lgm9j3q9.fsf@gnu.org>
@ 2017-08-24 4:56 ` Mark H Weaver
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark H Weaver @ 2017-08-24 4:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: Andy Wingo, guix-devel, 28211
ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Most likely just lucky, new grafting failure today.
>>
>> I've noticed they are more likely to occur when the host system is busy.
>> Grafting a large package such as 'texlive' is almost guaranteed to fail
>> on a fully-utilized machine.
>>
>> Maybe we should switch back to 2.0 for the time being?
>
> Yes, done: <https://bugs.gnu.org/28211>.
>
> I took a look: the code in (guix build graft) is multi-threaded but
> there’s no shared state among threads (except for the current
> output/error ports,
In Guile, port operations do not include built-in thread
synchronization, so it's not safe for multiple threads to write to the
current output/error ports concurrently. Those writes should be
protected by a mutex.
However, we had agreed that in 2.2, the port operations should be
implemented in such a way that the worst that could happen on typical
hardware in practice was for the output to be garbled. I didn't review
the new 2.2 ports code, so I'm not sure whether this was accomplished.
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-08-24 4:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20170731143925.GA19814@jasmine.lan>
[not found] ` <87wp6kuzrp.fsf@fastmail.com>
[not found] ` <87wp6fb0p7.fsf@fastmail.com>
[not found] ` <87efsljb63.fsf@igalia.com>
[not found] ` <87378lszri.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <87h8x04qky.fsf@fastmail.com>
[not found] ` <87wp5v2ylv.fsf@fastmail.com>
2017-08-23 22:53 ` bug#28211: Grafting fails for latest Go release candidate Ludovic Courtès
[not found] ` <87lgm9j3q9.fsf@gnu.org>
2017-08-24 4:56 ` Mark H Weaver
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).