From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id KD7mDVmENmfwNgEAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:14:33 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id KD7mDVmENmfwNgEAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2024 00:14:33 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=IrnhLrce; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=subvertising.org header.s=stigmate header.b=sXlbrfbj; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1731626073; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=klZkuqg/UajVp8yqFpf0LxGL6RrGjXZWNVBy4JICU0eLIHCRKA33ev1WHPWQC48eQnQ9dd zUymOQYbUaVrMOIc8vASWcs3C2L6gApvXE8dol2nQG5bgvjkDsuJWF8jQl5DSh7ZVRu2sn H7Tgmw+7pqnaZBulWlGQGYbjmi7NZP0TU9t9V6Al5AGqHBr5sMTuJ3PHZiE/f+ZpJTS0+Y 2rxpXZ2geD/h3oZTt+4r+fy2OutTDTtF18W+0DTywiS3WA1EDwoZXs98K6L2t0BkcrzwOK mHXCmeaMCQWXlon+3pAoTt+mUI9HCGBl4JeGIXvflRwQSX4CZJ4nBhdtmDmbEg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=IrnhLrce; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=subvertising.org header.s=stigmate header.b=sXlbrfbj; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1731626073; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=a07J5OzcSgbZMzSUjHn5wxEAuoxEERywggFiUaKNNBo=; b=VCG9E7N/VKNHLqsC4uNhUjIRWq+RgD3X6gOcoG8+Kg9ucHdWjmD/vxNCk3++CzbTXAqt79 8mpEcGS6I2XCk24d773B1I9tplYSDbpRtbY70YRxXVo/aD+q2RwKr3UmS95ZSEz0RTLBBC O24qHKhfKgK4j4d+DSDXokq61DcUQhlmwmp7tr1OtdcN+qQ5rWMTvfmKlY7ZzJRg/p5ZlS 4TYFZjZBcCHYRNajnd+2JjDB8hWF9INhSgaOLbsxfjN7AbWlEn4s2xZpzqFKQd0PUyDIwQ NUsfivDCf+1j+pUtt9mxOAuM8adLn8jZHIAW20wCSxZtVa9rs4p/2F1jDDxroA== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B08A7811DF for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2024 00:14:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj2K-0001NQ-Bg; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:14:04 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj2I-0001NI-UM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:14:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj2I-0006zV-LE for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:14:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=a07J5OzcSgbZMzSUjHn5wxEAuoxEERywggFiUaKNNBo=; b=IrnhLrceXUHMC4GWJk61t3v6k5rP2ygpInoJ4hiB0J1S6Xqu1NRV9pdmcrZYVQ5/CobskcA6wgcYgyzI1rl5CKpVPL9+zyNbvzNfau/BZDvgjtr2Q7cbl08Dp4LXibT1XGU3GqrGeLDCfbEWS36LQvJ/kWUhoKYvBU+arX+pb3p8APvW9IQRqjY3nhRAM1Dyp0XDKRQgNRwFxK7baQqrUOyM0kVXZ+/YaSCyc5IdLtp5d0/6ouSpk+Cxi+qUHz4DRUInnpqnjljCSnGUMj9HLIEMz/MBU1TZpaNtRSK1Y5vgxjr461EPceLazN9KtCz6/EwHISOPbwBO+LFroqsdeg==; Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj2I-0001Gx-Aq for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:14:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#67921] [PATCH v3 01/24] gnu: ghc: More robust build with binutils =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=89=A5?= 2.39. Resent-From: Divya Ranjan Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:14:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 67921 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch moreinfo To: Nicolas Graves Cc: dev@jpoiret.xyz, Lars-Dominik Braun , saku@laesvuori.fi, 67921@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 67921-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B67921.17316260094841 (code B ref 67921); Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:14:02 +0000 Received: (at 67921) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Nov 2024 23:13:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47702 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj1k-0001G1-NX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:13:29 -0500 Received: from confino.investici.org ([93.190.126.19]:57943) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tBj1i-0001Fr-1O for 67921@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:13:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=subvertising.org; s=stigmate; t=1731625996; bh=a07J5OzcSgbZMzSUjHn5wxEAuoxEERywggFiUaKNNBo=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=sXlbrfbj7X1hvdYiyXD4ma3+V6nvdf3/qqySFdWv27JvMdWLEzjfLDKolsnQxF1C1 30uIdyecfAOJ8ZFpbGlCmcaCkW7OdXVLf0P8GumZ6ays53g3TqHhD/fwwqs1T9KWkQ f9rbKjmRhsVCSCXAUwZyU91uK4loxDzxWR/rLkdg= Received: from mx1.investici.org (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by confino.investici.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4XqGCw3Y0pz11KN; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [93.190.126.19] (mx1.investici.org [93.190.126.19]) (Authenticated sender: divya@subvertising.org) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4XqGCv5DWlz11KM; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:13:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 23:13:08 +0000 User-Agent: Thunderbird for Android In-Reply-To: <87r07dtoh6.fsf@ngraves.fr> References: <20241031125127.14080-1-ngraves@ngraves.fr> <20241031125127.14080-2-ngraves@ngraves.fr> <87bjz09xqs.fsf@ngraves.fr> <87h68p322g.fsf@ngraves.fr> <871pzfwxix.fsf@subvertising.org> <87a5e34l73.fsf@ngraves.fr> <875xop3e62.fsf@subvertising.org> <87r07dtoh6.fsf@ngraves.fr> Message-ID: <4264BC22-4256-400A-A845-5852208AB8A2@subvertising.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----KYEOZ9P8RV17BFN0D8LT7S61DG4NLZ Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: Divya Ranjan X-ACL-Warn: , Divya Ranjan via Guix-patches From: Divya Ranjan via Guix-patches via Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.31 X-Spam-Score: -3.31 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B08A7811DF X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-TUID: CbL9DH9/iDss ------KYEOZ9P8RV17BFN0D8LT7S61DG4NLZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > The upside is more consistent and easier to understand code in Guix, the = downside is rebuild times=2E Only depends on how you weigh each other=2E Any estimation for the ballpark within which which it might fall? Here do = you mean rebuild times of each version? Like, this build time isn't going t= o affect user installation and creation of drvs, or would it? On 14 November 2024 22:55:17 GMT, Nicolas Graves wr= ote: >On 2024-11-14 17:42, Divya Ranjan wrote: > >> Nicolas Graves writes: >> >>> On 2024-11-13 04:47, Divya Ranjan via Guix-patches via wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Nicholas, Lars and others=2E >>>> >>>> I=E2=80=99ve planned to pick up the work needed for this upgrade=2E W= here are we >>>> and what more work is needed? A brief summary with specific tasks >>>> would help me get started=2E >>> >>> I haven't managed to get much more done=2E What happened is that >>> core-updates broke the original patch series, the patch I added fixes >>> the build of version 9=2E4=2E8 and makes a previous patch unnecessary,= but >>> the way I wrote it required to build from versions 8=2E6 (basically on= e >>> entire day of pure build on my machine)=2E >>> >>> If I were to rebuild everything from 8=2E6 once again, I would actuall= y >>> rather try the #:make-flag EXTRA_HC_OPTS (IIRC) which is definitely th= e >>> same thing in 9=2E4=2E8, but it wasn't that clear in 8=2E6=2E >> >> Is building everything from 8=2E6 a good idea though? Is it /that/ >> broken? > >The upside is more consistent and easier to understand code in Guix, the >downside is rebuild times=2E Only depends on how you weight each other= =2E > >>> From there you'll see that some tests for 9=2E6 are still broken=2E I= last >>> was working on decoupling the build (which works) from the tests (some >>> still failed, hard to understand why), because the rebuild is huge and >>> makes iterations quite painful=2E But even that is hard since you wou= ld >>> need the hadrian test phase to be run to get the necessary files >>> (hadrian config for tests and some binaries) to run tests independentl= y >>> in another guix package=2E IIRC I stopped there but still have some >>> progress in my stash=2E=20 >> >> Okay, is there any particular reason why this is being so hard? I >> haven=E2=80=99t seen such problems with Nix=2E > >It is hard to get what's wrong based on the error messages=2E Also when = I >tried to add options for more logging (don't remember which one I >tested) on Hadrian's options passed to the linker (through >EXTRA_HC_OPTS for instance), it fails because the option was >incompatible with another one set by Hadrian=2E I wanted to try more >logging options to at least have a better understanding of what was >going wrong, but then started on decoupling build and tests because of >the high rebuild time=2E > >There's still ultimately the option to skip the tests, which is not >difficult, but neither desirable=2E=20 >> >> Regards, > >--=20 >Best regards, >Nicolas Graves Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software ------KYEOZ9P8RV17BFN0D8LT7S61DG4NLZ Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> The upside is more consiste= nt and easier to understand code in Guix, the downside is rebuild times=2E = Only depends on how you weigh each other=2E

Any estimation for the b= allpark within which which it might fall? Here do you mean rebuild times of= each version? Like, this build time isn't going to affect user installatio= n and creation of drvs, or would it?


On 14 November 2024 22:55:17 GMT, Nicolas Graves <ng= raves@ngraves=2Efr> wrote:
On 2024-11-14 17:42, Divya Ranjan =
wrote:

 Nicolas Graves <ngraves@ngraves=2Efr> writes:

 On 2=
024-11-13 04:47, Divya Ranjan via Guix-patches via wrote:

 Hello Nicho=
las, Lars and others=2E

 I=E2=80=99ve planned to pick up the work ne=
eded for this upgrade=2E Where are we
 and what more work is needed? A b=
rief summary with specific tasks
 would help me get started=2E
=


 I haven't managed to get much more done=
=2E  What happened is that
 core-updates broke the original patch series=
, the patch I added fixes
 the build of version 9=2E4=2E8 and makes a pr=
evious patch unnecessary, but
 the way I wrote it required to build from=
 versions 8=2E6 (basically one
 entire day of pure build on my machine)=
=2E

 If I were to rebuild everything from 8=2E6 once again, I would =
actually
 rather try the #:make-flag EXTRA_HC_OPTS (IIRC) which is defin=
itely the
 same thing in 9=2E4=2E8, but it wasn't that clear in 8=2E6=2E=


 Is building everything from 8=
=2E6 a good idea though? Is it /that/
 broken?

The upside is more consistent and easier to understand c= ode in Guix, the
downside is rebuild times=2E Only depends on how you w= eight each other=2E

F= rom there you'll see that some tests for 9=2E6 are still broken=2E I last<= br>was working on decoupling the build (which works) from the tests (somestill failed, hard to understand why), because the rebuild is huge andmakes iterations quite painful=2E But even that is hard since you wouldneed the hadrian test phase to be run to get the necessary files
(hadr= ian config for tests and some binaries) to run tests independently
in an= other guix package=2E IIRC I stopped there but still have some
progress= in my stash=2E

Okay, is ther= e any particular reason why this is being so hard? I
haven=E2=80=99t se= en such problems with Nix=2E

It= is hard to get what's wrong based on the error messages=2E Also when Itried to add options for more logging (don't remember which one I
teste= d) on Hadrian's options passed to the linker (through
EXTRA_HC_OPTS for = instance), it fails because the option was
incompatible with another one= set by Hadrian=2E I wanted to try more
logging options to at least hav= e a better understanding of what was
going wrong, but then started on de= coupling build and tests because of
the high rebuild time=2E

Ther= e's still ultimately the option to skip the tests, which is not
difficul= t, but neither desirable=2E

Regards,

Divya Ranjan= , Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software
------KYEOZ9P8RV17BFN0D8LT7S61DG4NLZ--