* bug#25970: mozjs build failure
@ 2017-03-05 1:40 Leo Famulari
2019-02-04 22:27 ` Leo Famulari
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leo Famulari @ 2017-03-05 1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 25970; +Cc: Quiliro
----- Forwarded message from Quiliro <quiliro@riseup.net> -----
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 17:52:00 -0500
From: Quiliro <quiliro@riseup.net>
To: 25894@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#25894: guix system reconfigure error
I get the following error after
guix pull
and
guix system reconfigure /etc/config.scm
FAILURES:
--ion-eager /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug698584.js
--no-baseline
--no-ion /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug698584.js
--ion-eager /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug839215.js
--baseline-eager /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug839215.js
--baseline-eager --no-ti
--no-fpu /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug839215.js
--no-baseline --no-ion
--no-ti /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug839215.js
--no-baseline
--no-ion /tmp/guix-build-mozjs-24.2.0.drv-0/mozjs-24.2.0/js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/bug839215.js
TIMEOUTS: make: *** [Makefile:312: check-jit-test] Error 2 phase
`check' failed after 967.0 seconds builder for
`/gnu/store/0f5k3zc7l1mhgrjg0avnqy71afrs4ppn-mozjs-24.2.0.drv' failed
with exit code 1 cannot build derivation
`/gnu/store/3dzc4ngjk4zq8s5b3gxd55miqc8x6cr7-gnome-shell-3.22.2.drv': 1
dependencies couldn't be built cannot build derivation
`/gnu/store/6fv049a0blwg7d62c1xc68hc7czdqb17-gnome-3.22.2.drv': 1
dependencies couldn't be built guix system: error: build failed: build
of `/gnu/store/6fv049a0blwg7d62c1xc68hc7czdqb17-gnome-3.22.2.drv' failed
--
Saluton,
Quiliro
0987631031
----- End forwarded message -----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* bug#25970: mozjs build failure
2017-03-05 1:40 bug#25970: mozjs build failure Leo Famulari
@ 2019-02-04 22:27 ` Leo Famulari
2019-02-19 21:31 ` Andreas Enge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leo Famulari @ 2019-02-04 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 25970-done
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 258 bytes --]
The package in question, mozjs 24, is no longer used by gnome-shell, or
by any other Guix package.
So, if it still fails to build, we can consider removing it.
In any case, its build failure shouldn't be noticed by users anymore, so
I am closing this bug.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#25970: mozjs build failure
2019-02-04 22:27 ` Leo Famulari
@ 2019-02-19 21:31 ` Andreas Enge
2019-02-19 21:43 ` Leo Famulari
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Enge @ 2019-02-19 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo Famulari; +Cc: guix-devel
Hello,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 11:27:05PM +0100, Leo Famulari wrote:
> The package in question, mozjs 24, is no longer used by gnome-shell, or
> by any other Guix package.
>
> So, if it still fails to build, we can consider removing it.
the package builds, but I see no need to keep it. Do you agree to remove
it together with mozjs@17? The latter would require a little work, since
all other mozjs packages inherit from it. If there is consensus, I can
look into it.
Andreas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#25970: mozjs build failure
2019-02-19 21:31 ` Andreas Enge
@ 2019-02-19 21:43 ` Leo Famulari
2019-02-26 18:18 ` Alex Vong
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leo Famulari @ 2019-02-19 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Enge; +Cc: guix-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 360 bytes --]
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:31:03PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> the package builds, but I see no need to keep it. Do you agree to remove
> it together with mozjs@17? The latter would require a little work, since
> all other mozjs packages inherit from it. If there is consensus, I can
> look into it.
I agree, we don't need to keep any unused mozjs packages.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#25970: mozjs build failure
2019-02-19 21:43 ` Leo Famulari
@ 2019-02-26 18:18 ` Alex Vong
2019-02-26 22:10 ` Leo Famulari
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alex Vong @ 2019-02-26 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo Famulari; +Cc: guix-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 517 bytes --]
Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:31:03PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> the package builds, but I see no need to keep it. Do you agree to remove
>> it together with mozjs@17? The latter would require a little work, since
>> all other mozjs packages inherit from it. If there is consensus, I can
>> look into it.
>
> I agree, we don't need to keep any unused mozjs packages.
Are we keeping the latest version of mozjs? It can be useful for running
javascript (like node and gjs).
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#25970: mozjs build failure
2019-02-26 18:18 ` Alex Vong
@ 2019-02-26 22:10 ` Leo Famulari
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leo Famulari @ 2019-02-26 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Vong; +Cc: guix-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 664 bytes --]
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 02:18:57AM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:31:03PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> >> the package builds, but I see no need to keep it. Do you agree to remove
> >> it together with mozjs@17? The latter would require a little work, since
> >> all other mozjs packages inherit from it. If there is consensus, I can
> >> look into it.
> >
> > I agree, we don't need to keep any unused mozjs packages.
>
> Are we keeping the latest version of mozjs? It can be useful for running
> javascript (like node and gjs).
Yes, I think we should keep the latest version.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-26 22:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-03-05 1:40 bug#25970: mozjs build failure Leo Famulari
2019-02-04 22:27 ` Leo Famulari
2019-02-19 21:31 ` Andreas Enge
2019-02-19 21:43 ` Leo Famulari
2019-02-26 18:18 ` Alex Vong
2019-02-26 22:10 ` Leo Famulari
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.