From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id aMxmALROMGAxTwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:50:12 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id SEzFN7NOMGAzJwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:50:11 +0000 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 11214141C0 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 00:50:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50010 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFXG-0004Cc-8s for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:50:10 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33580) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFX8-0004CW-Ko for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:50:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39094) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFX8-0003Sh-Cw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:50:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFX8-0001xy-8X for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:50:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#44559: Resent-From: Carl Dong Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:50:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44559 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Maxime Devos Received: via spool by 44559-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44559.16137785697515 (code B ref 44559); Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:50:02 +0000 Received: (at 44559) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Feb 2021 23:49:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50640 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFWa-0001x9-Nu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:29 -0500 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:51951) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lDFWY-0001wx-Kf for 44559@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:27 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443C95C00C6; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:21 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=carldong.me; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm3; bh=H zYBDSuMXvYFJahXH0o+KFIZLmtXBnKeyvNMSxZ2vJ4=; b=Z80SZRt/DNGM3lJGR Xe8OkAJiwAMrn3KB2DlWTZIVye/w69+ChWL7qU1BU7H4T3RPAzV88JzhZR6CLkhb YoFlw3qum1z7bYJFHcYGGaK9EYxLWxd1ilP0EJGvTRafPRXwnLRFv2mvoprPIV/C qqw598gVK4eAI9pEKggniL67hkUeBukvE1/gk1Z061W9A+/ssO0IENpdYsC2TXjO 7FcjSFgFyBhvjRjLxUhJDXdEOuccughj/v5uxbi20IgCgIL+5VgZiQT1BFd2lnDQ luDVYv96Na0a72DQfqLxOsAYC/9vwoSFVLMZv/ZMqhTQGHutc4uAniZA+2WlJ4Cf Ydsng== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=HzYBDSuMXvYFJahXH0o+KFIZLmtXBnKeyvNMSxZ2v J4=; b=eaOb02zhz9MRAdvzXoli/dUgfntSac0wTyafsdBe8XxPRet7sl2t7QI7v 7tseIEAvIzU0wUB9J115QVVKYxwGkGokIm7qQ2f98LA7pR//Z9PSOuWAVzfPNFF6 t3O2T5G62RC5uVxdXw28b6ZUGHSCvGfPX7ny3kkzTmpn/9iN1daFn8mvoCBVlK+C uGHIn9MIVxYjKuvDm3cCRbC5zu++NUcwmXPvgof1FYsDKY0cyJGONT8QXjsp9Npx izuFuwaGKD4ydq6r6Ope9OJFrTPQl89JfU1iSoRsZ4KPmbwxmVMoTaSj/9w2UicF B2MCkcpu76Xn8P9miROEvPrd93tQg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrjeejgddugecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeevrghrlhcu ffhonhhguceotghonhhtrggtthestggrrhhlughonhhgrdhmvgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepieeltdelfffgveeijeetvdehjefgffeljeeiueetleeghfekvdeutdfgleefgeev necukfhppeeliedrvdefledrudejrddvgedvnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenuc frrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheptghonhhtrggtthestggrrhhlughonhhgrdhmvg X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.0.6] (pool-96-239-17-242.nycmny.fios.verizon.net [96.239.17.242]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9E75F24005A; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:20 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) From: Carl Dong In-Reply-To: <87lfbkkr6r.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:49:20 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <87d00los2d.fsf@cbaines.net> <87lfbkkr6r.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 44559@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.37 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=carldong.me header.s=fm3 header.b="Z80SZRt/"; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=eaOb02zh; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 11214141C0 X-Spam-Score: -0.37 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: Ly+LU93wu96n Hi Guix! Thanks to all of you for your thoughtful replies! On Feb 19, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > I agree it=E2=80=99s a problem, and yes, it would probably be a good = idea to > release 1.2.1 with the upgraded GnuTLS we now have in =E2=80=98master=E2= =80=99. I=E2=80=99m very heartened by your affirmation of the project=E2=80=99s = support of bootstrappability and building from source. :-) In addition, I think it would be good to make sure that the package = transformation options are powerful enough to allow users to sidestep = these problems in their own workflow and decrease the pressure on = maintainers. On Feb 19, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > =E2=80=98--without-tests=E2=80=99 should work, but you need to pass = the right version > number I guess? Oh! That may be the case. I am using `guix time-machine` however, and = that does not yet have the `--without-tests` flag, I have opened = bug#46650 so that we can discuss that issue there. On Feb 19, 2021, at 1:32 PM, Maxime Devos = wrote: > Alternatively, could the build container be adjusted to always begin = at > 1970-01-01, using =E2=80=98time namespaces=E2=80=99? Unfortunately, as Ludovic mentioned earlier in this thread, = time_namespaces(7) is only for CLOCK_MONOTONIC and. CLOCK_BOOTTIME. :-( Carl Dong contact@carldong.me "I fight for the users" > On Feb 19, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s = wrote: >=20 > Hi Carl, >=20 > Carl Dong skribis: >=20 >> As bitcoin core begins the planning to officially transition to = Guix-based releases, I've had many community members build guix v1.2.0 = from source and afterward attempt `--bootstrap --no-substitutes` builds. = As you may imagine, they are getting stuck on this gnutls problem and = cannot proceed further. >=20 > Yeah. :-/ >=20 >> I'm wondering: >>=20 >> 1. Is there a workaround that does not involve changing the system = time? We have attempted several flags: >> 1. --with-graft=3Dgnutls=3Dgnutls@3.6.14 >> 2. --without-tests=3Dgnutls >> 3. --with-input=3Dgnutls=3Dgnutls@3.6.14 >> These attempts all failed to work around this bug, and I=E2=80=99m= curious as to why that would be. My guess would be that when we do = `--bootstrap`, Guix bootstraps itself first without taking into account = these flags? >=20 > =E2=80=98--without-tests=E2=80=99 should work, but you need to pass = the right version > number I guess? >=20 >> 2. Since bootstrappability is one of the core tenets of Guix, might = it be appropriate to cut a v1.2.1 release with this problem (and any = other potential bootstrap problems) fixed? (Happy to discuss in separate = thread if more appropriate) >=20 > I agree it=E2=80=99s a problem, and yes, it would probably be a good = idea to > release 1.2.1 with the upgraded GnuTLS we now have in =E2=80=98master=E2= =80=99. >=20 > Longer-term, we need to find a way to address or avoid this issue. A > brute-force approach would be to have the build machines at ci.guix = run > with a clock ten years ahead. That should generally be fine since the > only place where timestamps matter are unmodified upstream tarballs. = In > all other cases, mtime is set to 1. >=20 > Perhaps we could start by testing this hypothesis on a separate build > farm. Chris, Mathieu, WDYT? >=20 > Thanks, > Ludo=E2=80=99.