Hi Simon,
Thank you!
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 12:12:39AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 at 22:48:33 +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > While reviewing the current uploads for the upcoming point release I
> > noticed that the i386 build of flatpak was apparently not done, and
> > indeed it failed.
> >
> > Attached are two build logs.
>
> The failing test runs a simple Python web server
> (`python3 ${builddir}/tests/http-utils-test-server.py 0`), reads back
> the port number that was allocated for it, and uses it to test Flatpak's
> http client implementation by connecting to http://localhost:$port.
> Instead, in those logs, it gets "Could not connect: Connection refused".
>
> Could x86-conova-01.debian.org be an IPv6-only buildd? If so, this
> reminds me of https://bugs.debian.org/948834 and is perhaps even the
> same bug (briefly: with the getaddrinfo flags normally used in GLib,
> if you have no IPv4 addresses other than 127.0.0.1 - not even RFC1918
> LAN addresses - then resolving 'localhost' in the obvious way will not
> yield 127.0.0.1 as expected).
>
> Post-buster versions of GLib avoid this by special-casing localhost to
> always resolve to 127.0.0.1 and/or ::1, like the major web browsers
> do. I think this should probably be something that glibc does, or at
> least something that glibc nsswitch plugins can do, rather than being
> individual network clients' responsibility, but that's not the way the
> nsswitch interface works right now.
>
> Or, if not that, could it be the case that this buildd is firewalled or
> otherwise restricted such that connections from the build to a test
> server listening on an arbitrary high port number on the loopback
> interface will fail?
>
> src:glib2.0 and src:dbus are examples of other packages that need to
> communicate with a TCP server on the loopback interface during their
> build-time tests. If the root cause for this is #948834, then this is
> also going to affect buster's glib2.0 next time we update that.
JFTR, this might indeed be the case. I gave it back a couple of times
and building on x86-conova-01.debian.org failed. The last one got
picked on buildd-x86-grnet-01 which now seems to have built.
I do not have details on the above questions.
Salvatore
