From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Baines Subject: Re: Ruby 2.5, pushing to staging? [UNSCANNED] Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2018 20:50:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87efd226se.fsf@cbaines.net> References: <87in2g0zlm.fsf@cbaines.net> <87ftxj1frh.fsf@cbaines.net> <874ldzs33j.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43531) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8sbW-0007Qy-CI for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 15:51:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8sbQ-0003XO-Cp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 15:51:08 -0400 Received: from li622-129.members.linode.com ([212.71.249.129]:40018 helo=mira.cbaines.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8sbQ-0003W9-0p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 15:51:04 -0400 In-reply-to: <874ldzs33j.fsf@elephly.net> 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: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: "guix-devel@gnu.org" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Christopher Baines writes: > >> I've tried builing locally with the following command, and I get >> something that suggests there may be a problem, but I'm not sure where >> to go from here. >> >> $ ./pre-inst-env guix build --no-grafts --rounds=3D2 --check ruby >> >> guix build: error: build failed: derivation `/gnu/store/37rb11ivy4w6ydn0= px386k158ixbgczz-ruby-2.5.1.drv' may not be deterministic > > You can add =E2=80=9C-K=E2=80=9D to keep the second build. Then you can = compare the two > directories with diffoscope. > > (You only need =E2=80=9C--check=E2=80=9D if you already have a local buil= d; =E2=80=9C--rounds=3D2=E2=80=9D > is for an initial build that should be performed twice.) Thanks, this works really well. Comparing the two outputs with diffoscope --exclude-command stat shows that there are some timestamp issues, some with the ri documentation, and others with the gemspec's for the bundled gems. Taking the same approach for ruby 2.4, ruby 2.5 actually seems a lot better. Ruby 2.4 seems to have some file ordering issues as well (although maybe they just didn't crop up for my build of Ruby 2.5) as well as some of the binary files differing. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAlu5EiFfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcACgkQXiijOwuE 9XeclA/6ApF50D0dTDzzhUtoMk10sTxtGnj/iyoOSqYkqnCkwwyeCN/rpem62l5z KczyBixXpo4y3lim8xerCWrwgzzVcNoQ9c2YmEFLAeR8qpvQO3kENW0dayFfgvfu DcMP+uU/9dwxwvrJtApL1T8RXN41fRTetGeHN9QqnWHBzMINK3ZvnANpElY/kFHc oFledlTeyCrBPm9gRwFhaiRbVnm8dGHIj5gkdzhhROrLdjYvOxznoL4QV6o9juI/ Y1lm/6WRW+FAyNbiyYVdsd4BC4ibMmgBy4QmXlUFLjh3WygQh0XxODpHMxneYTUv E1wggaE9BixIOd0S8U2a5N4w8tFDAuaWNbvj/SgLgv9TTVitcNYrFQNNaJFTSQn4 CLFeOTgCwcdMQ6PX/K2ioSB1XLBtYgU7pvhBbc+k9ExVRupnruYEY7GwWRdHNQAV 1k5Wtm3+2QLbMylwBj7aXHQkfuYtVlbmqUfW3QztfkhKafhV+LfRArumcce3PhjM Uidfl+LdiCr9fkBlS0xcAoqzsw/x2hdiNGwbza+IQt4clkHUo+u1rFIRKlEbCjXx 8xWrX8CwV3+x0dwqaNJi0PS3h8dpw/C8d8/VF1m1DiuQNd/k5cTOUKhiZ1+McYX3 RX6FTHpdek3iMWtzpV7xpHVCqNVToQFB8SgCh36dSUx5vx3Ay/8= =SPT/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--