On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:52:24PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure what's happening either, but more packages are
> becoming broken over time. I think it has to do with the fact that
> 'git' is one of the broken packages, and other packages that fetch their
> source code using 'git' are becoming broken whenever Guix decides it's
> time to try re-downloading the source, e.g.:
Okay, that is an interesting explanation!
> I've reverted the patch. After we have a solution to this problem, we
> can build it in a separate branch. I think we should have done this
> anyway, since updating Boost entails a lot of rebuilds, and has a
> history of being problematic on non-Intel platforms.
With only 69 dependent packages, it did not look like a big risk!
It just built with the patch on my mips machine:
Performing configuration checks
- 32-bit : yes
- arm : no
- mips1 : no
- power : no
- sparc : no
- x86 : no
- combined : no
I still find it suspicious that it is not recognised as "mips1"; it may
have to do with the different ABIs, since when I build it on debian,
it says "mips1 : yes".
I will push this to a wip-boost branch, and try to build a dependent package
locally. I wonder if I should base wip-boost on openssl-update; but with
only 69 dependent packages (if the count is true), it probably does not
matter.
Andreas
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Mark
