From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Woodcroft Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add dlib. Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:30:09 -0400 Message-ID: <6004b842-2434-9cdc-7a31-04231eac5941@uq.edu.au> References: <20160815222840.GA10735@jasmine> <4752bc68-5466-6c26-a7b4-e53aec400ff5@uq.edu.au> <8760r10z7n.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160816204736.GA25753@jasmine> <993034f9-ceae-525f-01b9-0b8af7a5aafe@uq.edu.au> <20160816234507.GA24224@jasmine> <87h9ajzc1z.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160818202353.GB2393@jasmine> <8737m1yqru.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <20160821201757.GA21038@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50724) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bbf0V-0005xu-PS for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:30:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bbf0R-0008MF-OT for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:30:35 -0400 Received: from mailhub1.soe.uq.edu.au ([130.102.132.208]:42628 helo=newmailhub.uq.edu.au) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bbf0R-0008LS-5A for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:30:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160821201757.GA21038@jasmine> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Leo Famulari , Marius Bakke Cc: guix-devel , Alex Kost On 21/08/16 16:17, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:52:37AM +0100, Marius Bakke wrote: >> Leo Famulari writes: >> >>> I pushed the patch as 5f0ff6a9e. Hopefully dlib is still useful without >>> lapack. We should really figure out what the issue is and fix it :) >> I noticed this fails to build on Hydra. What's worse is that the i686, >> x86_64 and armhf targets fails at completely different things. armhf and >> i686 exits cleanly after failing 2 and 5 tests respectively, while the >> x86_64 target seems to get the segfault we saw with lapack in inputs. >> >> What should we do? I'd prefer to keep the package so it can easily be >> tested on various architectures, but can understand if it is reverted. >> Perhaps we can disable substitutes or tests, to stop bothering Hydra? >> >> I'll try reproducing it this weekend on various qemu configurations. > Let us know about the results of your tests. Then we can decide what to > do. Can this be fixed simply by using #parallel-build #f ? Doing so makes it reproducible for me so arguably we should be doing that anyway, even if it takes longer to build. ben