Re: No mutter on master

[Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>]

Hi,

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

> Hello,
>
> currently I cannot reconfigure my laptop with the Xfce desktop environment
> due to mutter not building:
> Ok:                 166
> Expected Fail:      5
> Fail:               1
> Unexpected Pass:    0
> Skipped:            0
> Timeout:            0
> (this was on a local build).
>
> Given the amount of output, I find it difficult to see which test failed.
>
> I am on commit 972c06dc79641864b05590b2cd905cc8b810062b from yesterday.
> As far as I can see, the corresponding derivation has not been built by QA
> (following is my breadcrump trail of links followed from the data service):
>    https://data.guix.gnu.org/revision/972c06dc79641864b05590b2cd905cc8b810062b
>    https://data.guix.gnu.org/revision/972c06dc79641864b05590b2cd905cc8b810062b/packages
>    https://data.guix.gnu.org/revision/972c06dc79641864b05590b2cd905cc8b810062b/packages?locale=en_US.UTF-8&search_query=mutter&field=version&field=synopsis&after_name=&limit_results=100
>    https://data.guix.gnu.org/revision/972c06dc79641864b05590b2cd905cc8b810062b/package/mutter/44.9?locale=en_US.UTF-8
>    https://data.guix.gnu.org/gnu/store/gn3qgnzix2lnq4cg95samsy07zp0a8qr-mutter-44.9.drv
>
> Going back in time, the last successful build I could find was for commit
> ab41f5ec1cf559708165e1cd28e15538e6a197d6 of June 30. The next entry in the
> dataservice has status "unknown".
>
> After that, I do not see a commit that strikes me as suspicious as far as
> mutter is concerned.
>
> But there are quite a few patches applied to master recently of which I am
> not sure whether they have gone through QA and the process described here:
>    https://guix.gnu.org/en/manual/devel/en/html_node/Managing-Patches-and-Branches.html
> Going through QA should normally make sure that dependent packages still
> build and that substitutes are directly available (while for some recently
> updated packages there are no substitutes); I would like to invite all
> committers to follow this procedure.

Perhaps it was a bunch of patches I had manually applied and built.
They built fine for me, but if the mutter test is flaky, then it could
have slipped through, as it did the first time.

I didn't wait for QA on all of these patches, as some were old and
probably wouldn't have been built anyway, while some newer ones looked
trivial enough.

QA is awesome, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to produce a result,
I assume due to the lack of resources compared to Berlin.  Sorry for not
being patient with machines :-).

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim