From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: bug#29082: Guix-daemon has undefined reference to boost Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 16:40:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20171031154046.GA4546@jurong> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45904) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yg1-0000YG-38 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:42:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yfx-0004iy-W5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:42:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35713) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yfx-0004iu-Rs for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:42:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yfx-0005JK-MI for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:42:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44751) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yeu-0008PS-OX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:40:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yeq-0003hM-KT for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:40:56 -0400 Received: from mailrelay2-3.pub.mailoutpod1-cph3.one.com ([46.30.212.11]:48724) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e9Yeq-0003fz-Cb for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:40:52 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: 29082@debbugs.gnu.org Hello, I am currently trying to compile the most recent guix on debian on a novena arm board. First, I updated via git from release 0.12 to 0.13, then I used this to do a "guix pull" yesterday: $ guix --version guix (GNU Guix) 20171030.19 Then I updated all the packages in my profile using this guix version. When configuring and making guix from git checkout 56295c51609c07e287ae1c23adc2536bb3c8c3c0, linking the guix daemon leads to the following error: make[2]: Entering directory '/home/andreas/guix' CXXLD guix-daemon nix/nix-daemon/guix_daemon-nix-daemon.o: In function `nix::FormatOrString::FormatOrString(boost::basic_format const&)': /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' nix/nix-daemon/guix_daemon-nix-daemon.o: In function `acceptConnection': /home/andreas/guix/nix/nix-daemon/nix-daemon.cc:888: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::basic_format(std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocator > const&)' nix/nix-daemon/guix_daemon-nix-daemon.o: In function `nix::FormatOrString::FormatOrString(boost::basic_format const&)': /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' /home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: undefined reference to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' nix/nix-daemon/guix_daemon-guix-daemon.o:/home/andreas/guix/./nix/libutil/types.hh:36: more undefined references to `boost::basic_format::str[abi:cxx11]() const' follow collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status The same happens when I run "make" inside "guix environment guix" (however, I did not reconfigure, since I would then have to wait another hour or two to reach this point). What is surprising is that "guix pull" succeeded, apparently with the same code. Andreas