From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: 01/02: gnu: qemu: Update to 2.9.0 [security fixes]. Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:37:42 -0400 Message-ID: <20170421173742.GA3370@jasmine> References: <20170420182405.2682.82446@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20170420182405.ED2D520740@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87zifa602c.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52924) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1cVG-00080H-RV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:37:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1cVC-0005lW-08 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:37:54 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:46899) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d1cVB-0005l1-PR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:37:49 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zifa602c.fsf@netris.org> 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: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 09:06:51PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > leo@famulari.name (Leo Famulari) writes: > > gnu: qemu: Update to 2.9.0 [security fixes]. >=20 > Thanks for this! Obviously it's an important security update, but: >=20 > On my x86_64 system running GuixSD, 'grub' now fails to build from > source. Three times in a row, the 'grub_cmd_set_date' has failed. > Here's the relevant excerpt from test-suite.log (lightly formatted): >=20 > FAIL: grub_cmd_set_date > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Has anyone else seen this? I just ran the build 5 times on my x86_64 machine, and it failed this test 1/5 times. We could try patching the test file with 'set -x' to trace the execution of the script and see exactly what goes wrong. --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAlj6Q2IACgkQJkb6MLrK fwgPLA/+NvY6Nl2tUfdjP0VukKd/6E7isOw1rih3WuunJeYcoqElO6tq2Zgz8IVg 23vW+fF71cQIELCk+Hb1I9cH8mk8c2sWeLAEZp+bXYFSflcQ5zEXban56ELDROC0 5aG7tyebY5DqpSr7vM31Tgx4uAy866O0l9vdBjcICJMSwUxiknC2vsLATyK1VwZr RNL9TOHcXLMdZ34RjS9UJ54O/uDwANf6g6+ibiQMf7tmtlj/w+0s53AwO7guSRfe 1hAw+DUQMoO+GZYYIYvNwCNSWndDRTi9yrXedGSMa0pSxU7Lp4XkuLRuIwYd8Ub5 C4SylZ3ZtxzpbN9Nxfd6RPx5AvNxvuG8NqpeB9pe4FIq1CsKm3sN1JP0p72RCuN0 +L9h9xb80I1HOYczj6+lK0ZMCEosFjeqb4iYUVQH9aP5PcW8Jt09RnPFWiYfpH44 Jkl7KBpMHVM9hef+y0Wj8QOgeB4IQhv9srl/RRHp276mYNzRh6qM4gnV4qQW6t2+ BHZtpKbyXW94AoJGAwbUSgkl+dCz+BDGU17iTyp1vIZ8KuZ2p4ekOGPmDvHNXbfw LHSFOy9amQkz04j9QG9TNNX2xWqSqHuYGH9gmTNqzdCA7HAYq8HOSUVzX66YdBOw 0iKLRH3FnzxKlAel1fXLr7bHs2GbvFBA8dsRBWI2p5RvzgFGhB4= =1pMe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7--