From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:5f26::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id sC6QBMo+lmUvGAAAkFu2QA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 06:14:50 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4E+2AMo+lmVdzQAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 06:14:50 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=protonmail.com header.s=protonmail3 header.b=XWArZzqJ; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=protonmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1704345289; h=from:from:sender:sender: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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=aRECKxTSyrWipYx3s04SZrAe8AWjtCFmzI5idBMAlIQ=; b=tyF8mRrQoN+a8Lv0fm/dbxzV2Tp4zHuMls/+AwQc2dGxiv/yvrgPIMgey/QpaNvggMxnnQ yj85BA4frvFbzZlCDMghlbPykdQtjJzjmVRdR+s+5waRhvK45cW7jT3XhbdNK+YWJAvL6t XCdNXJDaxGoUegcZOZz5xIBBUm97N7VWMDn01xEFBERxRITCKkmnkf1ONrPiSF/y9v7td4 RFrT28VPsZMD+wI/maZEboZ9rTyJn/flcdk6KeCuB6iK3zfgkgib3Y6zFQwVgN763lwbbq hsgskxsoKB66Ut/UYStH3vvRtMo9zo+RtBdiB/X0yuYKzVl834hkDk+FApBuKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=protonmail.com header.s=protonmail3 header.b=XWArZzqJ; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=protonmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1704345289; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=QtuESTaprBMYeLLrMlq0COD/AeFUaY5dc2oPVGfgiueI0WprgekSvXTn2O1ZHV3AKZR9DH gi2Wr876UCJU5FJ22+a4JPC6sDWy/xK+dO2kRBFj2SoENlFijTCHQsVBGjTiXp0QQw9q9K 6oYOckJCKtdigIRjyAfuyS5z0AcTXnLwBAFQPUg6IH7j9Ws3hL0nDAR9wIQEOetBt70pzi 59yvbjd3n+3gIYVtFxSFzR7vrTlBxyM2T1G+TN94CqdJfIaYBa4TTsDIu4a2ND7x5FADuU jt9dZKu2bFg0dEGVnWdi4h3JAP0Lia5qawEuqq/BH5BiUF6kgPbRBvvix49ZNQ== 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 6AF1240872 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 06:14:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLG3R-0000it-UJ; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:14:05 -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 1rLG3P-0000iU-PC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:14:03 -0500 Received: from mail-40131.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.131]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLG3M-0002ll-Rb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:14:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1704345236; x=1704604436; bh=aRECKxTSyrWipYx3s04SZrAe8AWjtCFmzI5idBMAlIQ=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=XWArZzqJxYNhwS5ZRT1wQNK/5rqtUgx89/A9ZmtAIckkmXwVtk51fCGmEVwWZCLOe Ua/mTwZhAerHR8+6QMXisWv1zqPCrhijFBat+I93gFRTrgnnzlfR6bPApqEphsbtUY g1MAzEyI+Igimtw4x016mAN1RbN+YguPIsqS+dKY4T2T52BIXCnqge7rnQ2KWTpYcq /t6LqWG6pL96wkasEdb9/OBJksESuvjC5HuHHHWkALuXALY1xfLOzFyvCAC6BWqd+y Lq6U6ei55tmChb9LaN91JhCHDdIzrUlhTh4YD8smlAL3o5Hg6WVSSnEPe2rg5H3dL7 YLXZvb77Sx2jg== Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 05:13:46 +0000 To: Efraim Flashner From: John Kehayias Cc: guix-devel , Kaelyn , Maxim Cournoyer , Liliana Marie Prikler , Vivien Kraus , 67875@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: xwayland security updates, to mesa- or core-updates or ? Message-ID: <87a5pl4r5o.fsf@protonmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <878r5nqmod.fsf@protonmail.com> Feedback-ID: 7805494:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.131; envelope-from=john.kehayias@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40131.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list 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+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Scanner: mx13.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.47 X-Spam-Score: -3.47 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 6AF1240872 X-TUID: xRsg7GPXVJDB Hi Efraim and guix-devel On Mon, Dec 25, 2023 at 08:44 AM, Efraim Flashner wrote: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 09:19:27AM +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 09:18:50PM +0000, John Kehayias wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 12:57 AM, John Kehayias wrote: >> > [snip] >> > >> > I haven't seen QA process this branch, so I'm just going with what I >> > see on Berlin. From the branches overview it shows about 61% last I >> > saw, compared to 72% for master. Unfortunately, non x86 architectures >> > are usually better covered by Bordeaux, but I don't know where to get >> > a sense of that coverage. For what it is worth, Efraim has manually >> > built xorgproto and mesa at least on powerpc64le, riscv64, without >> > issues. >> >> I had berlin build for powerpc64le and that went without any problems. >> Locally I built for riscv64 and powerpc and those both built fine. I >> ran into an issue locally with curl on aarch64 and test 1477(?) which is >> weird since it's supposed to be skipped but I'm sending it through >> again. Haven't started armhf yet. >> >> > Coverage on x86_64 and i686 seems good from what I can tell. I also >> > don't think there are any other branches ready to merge, and would >> > like to give them time to rebuild once these changes hit. >> > >> > Any thoughts on when to merge? >> > >> > Thanks everyone! >> > John > Coming back to this point, seems Berlin is doing better with building but I don't see mesa-updates on QA so I'm not sure about non x86_64/i686-linux coverage. Anyone have any thoughts? I don't know that I've seen real new failures, as still lots of "missing derivation" or other transient issues that resolve on forcing a rebuild. I don't want to merge to master and have issues with substitute coverage, but do have to call it at some point or will end up keep scheduling/waiting for rebuilds to happen anyway. Thoughts? > I've been having trouble with curl on aarch64 again. Looking at this > snippet from the build log: > > test 1477...[Verify that error codes in headers and libcurl-errors.3 are = in sync] > > 1477: stdout FAILED: > --- log/1/check-expected 2023-12-22 10:53:51.658667071 +0000 > +++ log/1/check-generated 2023-12-22 10:53:51.658667071 +0000 > @@ -1 +0,0 @@ > -Result[LF] > > - abort tests > test 1475...[-f and 416 with Content-Range: */size] > --pd---e--- OK (1247 out of 1472, remaining: 00:45, took 5.310s, duration= : 04:11) > test 1474...[HTTP PUT with Expect: 100-continue and 417 response during u= pload] > --pd---e--- OK (1246 out of 1472, remaining: 00:48, took 22.794s, duratio= n: 04:29) > Warning: test1474 result is ignored, but passed! > ... > TESTFAIL: These test cases failed: 1477 > > It looks like 1474 is passing locally and the ~1474 is telling the test > suite to ignore the result. If that's how ~ is interpreted then > I'd suggest that 1477 is failing hard enough that it's taking the test > suite with it, not merely ignoring the result. I'll continue poking it > but right now I'm starting to like the hurd plan of disabling the test > instead of merely ignoring the result. Thanks for looking at this Efraim. Looks like a good chunk of the curl rebuilds did get through, did it look okay on aarch64 and anywhere else you checked? John