| Message ID | 87pm7wvq5e.fsf@gmx.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#63008,core-updates] gnu: gdb@11: Update to 11.2. | expand |
Hello Pierre, we also have gdb@12 in core-updates; does this also not build? Right now none of the two have been built on aarch64 on CI, so I lack an overview. On x86_64, both build; @12 has 101 dependents, @11 7563! This cannot be accomodated on core-updates any more, I am afraid. We will need to build it out afterwards. And probably the best course of action would be to move the dependents to gdb@12; or drop the dependency? Why do so many packages depend on a debugger? Andreas
Hi Andreas, sorry I missed your reply! Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes: > Hello Pierre, > > we also have gdb@12 in core-updates; does this also not build? Right now > none of the two have been built on aarch64 on CI, so I lack an overview. Yup, gdb@12 builds just fine for me! > > On x86_64, both build; @12 has 101 dependents, @11 7563! > This cannot be accomodated on core-updates any more, I am afraid. > > We will need to build it out afterwards. And probably the best course > of action would be to move the dependents to gdb@12; or drop the > dependency? Why do so many packages depend on a debugger? Yeah gdb is used as a dependency for testing rust, I'm not sure if it has to be 11, it can probably work with 12 although I haven't tried. I think the main reason we still have gdb 11 is to make sure we don't rebuild the rust world. I'm afraid if we don't do update it know, we'll have to do it quite soon, can the rust world be rebuilt on a staging branch soon after the core-updates merge? I'm concerned that these days a lot relies on rust (via librsvg IIRC), so not having it available might be an issue, even for simple systems :-/. All that being said, it might be possible to add a separate gdb@11.2 package, and only use it for rust on non-x86, in a way that doesn't cause a rebuild, could that work? Thanks, Pierre
Hello Pierre, Am Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 08:04:18PM +0100 schrieb Pierre Langlois: > I think the main reason we still have gdb 11 is to make sure we don't > rebuild the rust world. I'm afraid if we don't do update it know, we'll > have to do it quite soon, can the rust world be rebuilt on a staging > branch soon after the core-updates merge? definitely, there already is a rust-team branch, and the rust team is in the starting block. Discussing gdb in this context would probably be a good idea! Andreas
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 10:12:35PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > Hello Pierre, > > Am Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 08:04:18PM +0100 schrieb Pierre Langlois: > > I think the main reason we still have gdb 11 is to make sure we don't > > rebuild the rust world. I'm afraid if we don't do update it know, we'll > > have to do it quite soon, can the rust world be rebuilt on a staging > > branch soon after the core-updates merge? > > definitely, there already is a rust-team branch, and the rust team is in > the starting block. Discussing gdb in this context would probably be > a good idea! I also noticed that gdb-11.1 failed to build on core-updates on riscv64-linux. I can confirm that gdb-12 does build on riscv64-linux on core-updates. I haven't tried yet to use gdb-12 in place of gdb-11 in the rust tests, but I assume it would work. I'll test it out on x86_64 on core-updates to see if it works. It sounds like as it currently stands neither aarch64 nor riscv64 have a working rust on core-updates. I suppose, in order to decrease the number of rebuilds, we could introduce gdb-11.2 and use that as the gdb input in rust for those two architectures until I can either switch everyone to 11.2 in the rust-team branch or switch everyone to gdb-12.
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 10:12:35PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > Hello Pierre, > > Am Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 08:04:18PM +0100 schrieb Pierre Langlois: > > I think the main reason we still have gdb 11 is to make sure we don't > > rebuild the rust world. I'm afraid if we don't do update it know, we'll > > have to do it quite soon, can the rust world be rebuilt on a staging > > branch soon after the core-updates merge? > > definitely, there already is a rust-team branch, and the rust team is in > the starting block. Discussing gdb in this context would probably be > a good idea! I was able to build rust-1.60 on core-updates on x86_64 using gdb-minimal. IMO we should switch to that for aarch64/riscv64 and then I'll switch x86_64 over to it later in the rust-team branch.
Hello Efraim, Am Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 01:46:47PM +0300 schrieb Efraim Flashner: > It sounds like as it currently stands neither aarch64 nor riscv64 have a > working rust on core-updates. I am not sure whether it works, but at least it builds on aarch64: https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/37421/details This is rust-1.60, our publicly visible version; internally we are at 1.65, which I suppose the rust-team branch is going to make visible soon. I also see a few green dots of rust-* packages in the dashboard, alongside many red dots; a random sample of them shows they suffer from the infamous cuirass bug "cannot build missing derivation". So I think we are good as far as core-updates is concerned, and you can make the changes on the rust-team branch when you see fit. Andreas
Am Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 03:05:51PM +0200 schrieb Andreas Enge: > I am not sure whether it works, but at least it builds on aarch64: > https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/37421/details > This is rust-1.60 It was also the version from January, while the current one does not build. Sorry for the noise, and looking forward to the rust-team branch merge! Andreas
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 03:01:15PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 10:12:35PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > > Hello Pierre, > > > > Am Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 08:04:18PM +0100 schrieb Pierre Langlois: > > > I think the main reason we still have gdb 11 is to make sure we don't > > > rebuild the rust world. I'm afraid if we don't do update it know, we'll > > > have to do it quite soon, can the rust world be rebuilt on a staging > > > branch soon after the core-updates merge? > > > > definitely, there already is a rust-team branch, and the rust team is in > > the starting block. Discussing gdb in this context would probably be > > a good idea! > > I was able to build rust-1.60 on core-updates on x86_64 using > gdb-minimal. IMO we should switch to that for aarch64/riscv64 and then > I'll switch x86_64 over to it later in the rust-team branch. I've since switched rust to using gdb-12.1 and removed gdb-11 from Guix. Closing this bug!
From dd8ab2ac3659057241707f05a5a63910aa1da677 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 Message-Id: <dd8ab2ac3659057241707f05a5a63910aa1da677.1682115065.git.pierre.langlois@gmx.com> From: Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois@gmx.com> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 22:53:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] gnu: gdb@11: Update to 11.2. * gnu/packages/gdb.scm (gdb-11): Update to 11.2. --- gnu/packages/gdb.scm | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/gdb.scm b/gnu/packages/gdb.scm index 82050d9ac5..dfc32ea2fb 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/gdb.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/gdb.scm @@ -48,14 +48,14 @@ (define-module (gnu packages gdb) (define-public gdb-11 (package (name "gdb") - (version "11.1") + (version "11.2") (source (origin (method url-fetch) (uri (string-append "mirror://gnu/gdb/gdb-" version ".tar.xz")) (sha256 (base32 - "151z6d0265hv9cgx9zqqa4bd6vbp20hrljhd6bxl7lr0gd0crkyc")))) + "0cif2n3wfg1w8vc1kfnp6358idxa1zj0wjm8m5qqc6w8f5mc75ql")))) (build-system gnu-build-system) (outputs '("out" "debug")) (arguments -- 2.39.2