From: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org>
Cc: 49515@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#49515: [core-updates] mescc-tools tests fail
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:40:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fsw18fre.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87im16j4bo.fsf@gnu.org> (Jan Nieuwenhuizen's message of "Mon, 19 Jul 2021 06:49:31 +0200")
Hi Janneke!
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> skribis:
>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> skribis:
>>
>>> On commit 9b4c3c675c05870e5983c21ce4ff944e0b0bc2fa of ‘core-updates’,
>>> mescc-tools fails tests, with generated binaries segfaulting:
>>>
>>> $ ./pre-inst-env guix build mescc-tools
>>>
>>> […]
>>>
>>> + . ./sha256.sh
>>> ++ set -ex
>>> ++ ./bin/get_machine
>>> + ./bin/M1 -f test/test3/defs -f test/test3/lisp.s --BigEndian --architecture knight-native -o test/test3/hold
>>> + '[' amd64 = amd64 ']'
>>> + ./test/results/test1-binary
>>> + ./bin/hex2 -f elf_headers/elf32.hex2 -f test/test2/hold --LittleEndian --architecture x86 --BaseAddress 0x8048000 -o test/results/test2-binary --exec_enable
>>> test/test1/hello.sh: line 37: 125 Segmentation fault ./test/results/test1-binary < test/test1/hex0.hex0 > test/test1/proof1
[...]
>> Should we upgrade instead? If we do, what’s the potential for breakage?
>> Should ‘mes-rb5’ be kept on an older version?
>
> We could try that, I really can't tell if upgrading to 1.1.0 creates
> a different mes binary.
I took this route and everything went well, and we can now build
‘bootstrap-tarballs’ on x86_64-linux. I ended up doing additional
changes:
e2690a8eb2 gnu: mes-rb5: Remove.
da32015db0 gnu: mes-minimal-stripped: Explicitly disallow references.
5510e1c483 gnu: mes: Remove 0.19.
81096caf7d gnu: mes: Switch to Guile 3.0.
114a9f1f80 gnu: mescc-tools: Update to 1.2.0.
0b9da8b5a2 gnu: m2-planet: Update to 1.8.0.
8b627a7701 gnu: mes-minimal: Remove unused variable.
Removing ‘mes-rb5’ was a bit disheartening but I guess it’d have to be
updated to the current tool versions.
I removed Mes 0.19 because it failed to build with Guile 3.0 and didn’t
appear to be needed any longer.
Let me know if you think I did anything wrong!
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-26 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-10 23:56 bug#49515: [core-updates] mescc-tools tests fail Ludovic Courtès
2021-07-18 21:04 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-07-18 21:08 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-07-19 4:49 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2021-07-26 11:40 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2021-07-26 13:43 ` Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87fsw18fre.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=49515@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=janneke@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.