Documenting Cuirass features (was: List of failing packages)

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Roel Janssen writes: > >> With Hydra, when clicking on a failed build you could see >> previous builds of that same package and its success or failure of >> them. I found that very useful. > > For previous builds you can use a query like > >icecat spec:guix-master s

Help on search (was: List of failing packages)

Am 04.11.19 um 16:26 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus: > For previous builds you can use a query like > >icecat spec:guix-master system:x86_64-linux Would be great if the page would contain a small help on this. I'm using this too seldom, so I just can not remember it. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Har

Re: List of failing packages

Roel Janssen writes: > With Hydra, when clicking on a failed build you could see > previous builds of that same package and its success or failure of > them. I found that very useful. For previous builds you can use a query like icecat spec:guix-master system:x86_64-linux and it will sho

Re: List of failing packages

On Mon, 2019-11-04 at 14:51 +0100, Julien Lepiller wrote: > Le 4 novembre 2019 13:28:57 GMT+01:00, Roel Janssen a > écrit : > > Dear Guix, > > > > I'm trying to contribute to GNU Guix again, and I'd like to see if > > I > > can solve build failures to make for a more stable Guix. It would > > be

Re: List of failing packages

Le 4 novembre 2019 13:28:57 GMT+01:00, Roel Janssen a écrit : >Dear Guix, > >I'm trying to contribute to GNU Guix again, and I'd like to see if I >can solve build failures to make for a more stable Guix. It would be >very convenient to have a list of packages that are currently failing >to build,

List of failing packages

Dear Guix, I'm trying to contribute to GNU Guix again, and I'd like to see if I can solve build failures to make for a more stable Guix. It would be very convenient to have a list of packages that are currently failing to build, and perhaps also some history on it (how many times did the build fa

Re: core-updates failing packages

Leo Famulari writes: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:44:19PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> You can also try rebuilding your GuixSD on ‘core-updates’, or upgrade >> your profile, and see whether you encounter problems. > > Yes, please test, especially with your graphical applications or > systems,

Re: core-updates failing packages

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:44:19PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Please people take a look at > so we > can merge this branch before the summer ends. :-) I think this is the best page to look at: https://hydra.gnu.org/eval/109728

Re: core-updates failing packages

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:44:19PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > You can also try rebuilding your GuixSD on ‘core-updates’, or upgrade > your profile, and see whether you encounter problems. Yes, please test, especially with your graphical applications or systems, and with the more esoteric stuf

Re: core-updates failing packages

Hello Guix! I’ve just pushed a few fixes (Perl “dotless @INC” issues, python-pexpect, gnome-mime-data), which should allow us to go further. I’ve started a new evaluation. Please people take a look at so we can merge this branch bef

Re: core-updates failing packages

Ben Woodcroft writes: > On 20/07/17 16:17, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >> Ben Woodcroft writes: >> >>> I have a patch ready but will push this as a part of a series that >>> updates htslib to 1.5. Just to say that I'm working on it and noone else >>> should spend time on this, I'm almost there. >> Th

Re: core-updates failing packages

On 20/07/17 16:17, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: Ben Woodcroft writes: I have a patch ready but will push this as a part of a series that updates htslib to 1.5. Just to say that I'm working on it and noone else should spend time on this, I'm almost there. Thanks for letting me know. I was working on

Re: Staging [was Re: core-updates failing packages]

Leo Famulari skribis: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:09:28AM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: >> I was also thinking of updating ruby. Are we planning on merging the staging >> branch before core-updates? > > I wasn't aware people were working on the staging branch. If the changes > are not very disrupt

Staging [was Re: core-updates failing packages]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:09:28AM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: > I was also thinking of updating ruby. Are we planning on merging the staging > branch before core-updates? I wasn't aware people were working on the staging branch. If the changes are not very disruptive, perhaps we could merge it in

Re: core-updates failing packages

Ben Woodcroft writes: > I have a patch ready but will push this as a part of a series that > updates htslib to 1.5. Just to say that I'm working on it and noone else > should spend time on this, I'm almost there. Thanks for letting me know. I was working on this, too, but it was quite a bit mo

Re: core-updates failing packages

Hi Leo, Thanks for taking the time to list these issues - helpful. On 15/07/17 02:50, Leo Famulari wrote: metabat fails: https://hydra.gnu.org/build/2171756 This fails due to the issue described at https://bitbucket.org/berkeleylab/metabat/issues/28/compilation-fail-with-boost-164 I have a

core-updates failing packages

The armhf port is currently blocked while we try to build Guile 2.2.2, so I'm focusing on x86_64-linux for now. Here is a list of failing packages on x86_64-linux that need some help: gnome-mime-data fails due to a regex parsing issue that was exposed by the update to Perl 5.26.0:

Re: failing packages

Andreas Enge writes: > There is a new version upstream (1.2.2); is it safe to try an update, > or do the bioinformaticians need to keep the old version? We could update. If someone needs an older version they could easily create a variant, I suppose. (I cannot make the update myself as I’ll b

Re: failing packages

As far as I can tell, we can disable hisat on arm and mips. There is a file sse_util.h that seems to be included unconditionally. Andreas

Re: failing packages

On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:56:05 +0200 Andreas Enge wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 12:52:53PM +0200, Pjotr Prins wrote: > > Anything bioinformatics is not really used on non Intel architectures. > > It may change later but, yes, defaulting to x86_64 is the quick option > > fo

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:04:34PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > It’s a bioinfo library, so I don’t think MIPS (or ARM) is officially > supported, but personally I would like to resist the urge to declare all > bioinfo tools unsupported on non-Intel. In this case, they are: print "checking machin

Re: failing packages

There is a new version upstream (1.2.2); is it safe to try an update, or do the bioinformaticians need to keep the old version? Andreas

Re: failing packages

Andreas Enge writes: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 12:52:53PM +0200, Pjotr Prins wrote: >> Anything bioinformatics is not really used on non Intel architectures. >> It may change later but, yes, defaulting to x86_64 is the quick option >> for failing packages. I prefer we

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 12:52:53PM +0200, Pjotr Prins wrote: > Anything bioinformatics is not really used on non Intel architectures. > It may change later but, yes, defaulting to x86_64 is the quick option > for failing packages. I prefer we change them that way. How about ngs-sdk, wh

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 06:45:46PM +0200, Federico Beffa wrote: >> This is part of the ieeetran LaTeX package. > > I do not think so; the current file is called IEEEtran.cls, and according to >http://www.michaelshell.org/tex/ieeetran/ > th

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 06:45:46PM +0200, Federico Beffa wrote: > This is part of the ieeetran LaTeX package. I do not think so; the current file is called IEEEtran.cls, and according to http://www.michaelshell.org/tex/ieeetran/ the first version dates from 1993 (so after fastcap) and was calle

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 06:21:24PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: >> Do you have some (la-)tex experience and could have a look? > > Apparently you do and could! > >> So clearly we need to remove psfig.sty from the tarball > > This is still valid,

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 06:21:24PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > Do you have some (la-)tex experience and could have a look? Apparently you do and could! > So clearly we need to remove psfig.sty from the tarball This is still valid, we need a snippet... > There is one more dubious file in the do

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:11:52AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > No. How about the attached patch? Much better, of course, thanks! Maybe upstream could be convinced to include some detection of the availability of sse. Andreas

Re: failing packages

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 01:14:22PM +0200, Federico Beffa wrote: > Yes, the software dates 1992 and works great. Electromagnetism has not > changed since then. Well, maybe the physics have not, but compilers and language standards have; it is rare to see very old code compiling without problems tod

Re: failing packages

Looking further: A macro was removed from TeXLive 2015 because of a license problem. I've pushed a fix to generate the fastcap documentation using a different macro. Regards, Fede On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Federico Beffa wrote: > The problem appears to be with TeXLive 2015 and its 'dvips

Re: failing packages

The problem appears to be with TeXLive 2015 and its 'dvips' command being unable to handle some .ps files: https://www.tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2015-June/037013.html Could you please look into this? Thanks, Fede On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Federico Beffa wrote: > Andreas Enge writes: >

Re: failing packages

Andreas Enge writes: > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 12:48:12PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote: >> chicken: >> guix refresh -l chicken: no dependant packages. >> Has not built successfully since early May. >> x86_64: http://hydra.gnu.org/build/701776/nixlog/1 (~1900 lines) runtime >> tests >> timed out

Re: failing packages

Anything bioinformatics is not really used on non Intel architectures. It may change later but, yes, defaulting to x86_64 is the quick option for failing packages. I prefer we change them that way. Pj. On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:02:06PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > How about non-sequen

Re: failing packages

Andreas Enge writes: > How about non-sequencer? >http://hydra.gnu.org/build/725259/nixlog/1/tail-reload > > It fails with messages > g++: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-msse2’ > g++: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-mfpmath=sse’ > g++: error: unrecognized command

Re: failing packages

How about non-sequencer? http://hydra.gnu.org/build/725259/nixlog/1/tail-reload It fails with messages g++: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-msse2’ g++: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-mfpmath=sse’ g++: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-msse2’ g++: error:

Re: failing packages

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 12:48:12PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote: > chicken: > guix refresh -l chicken: no dependant packages. > Has not built successfully since early May. > x86_64: http://hydra.gnu.org/build/701776/nixlog/1 (~1900 lines) runtime tests > timed out > armhf: http://hydra.gnu.org/buil

Re: failing packages

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:37:56 +1000 Ben Woodcroft wrote: > > On 14/10/15 23:29, Andreas Enge wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:41:13PM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: > >> The author agrees. Patch attached. > > Looks good, please push, and thanks for enquiring! > Cool. Only, would you mind pushin

Re: failing packages

On 14/10/15 23:29, Andreas Enge wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:41:13PM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: The author agrees. Patch attached. Looks good, please push, and thanks for enquiring! Cool. Only, would you mind pushing please? I don't have rights.

Re: failing packages

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:41:13PM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: > The author agrees. Patch attached. Looks good, please push, and thanks for enquiring! Andreas

Re: failing packages

On 06/10/15 21:52, Ben Woodcroft wrote: On 06/10/15 19:48, Efraim Flashner wrote: diamond: fails on non-x86_64 targets. This package is part of bioinformatics.scm so it may not be intended for non-x86_64 targets. I imagine it is safe to say so for diamond, but I've asked the authors just in cas

Re: failing packages

Alex Kost skribis: > Ricardo Wurmus (2015-10-06 15:25 +0300) wrote: > >> I would like to note that I find it quite hard to use the hydra >> interface as it doesn’t seem to support filtering. (Do we have an Emacs >> mode for displaying hydra tables?) Currently it’s a bit discouraging to >> work

Re: failing packages

Ricardo Wurmus (2015-10-06 15:25 +0300) wrote: > I would like to note that I find it quite hard to use the hydra > interface as it doesn’t seem to support filtering. (Do we have an Emacs > mode for displaying hydra tables?) Currently it’s a bit discouraging to > work go through the list of failu

Re: failing packages

k go through the list of failures without a convenient way to > restrict the list to certain architectures or failure type. I would say that the aim is to have such a short list of failures that there is no need for filtering :-) At some point in time, I thought that zero failing packages woul

Re: failing packages

Efraim Flashner writes: > bwa: > fails on non-x86_64 targets. > This package is part of bioinformatics.scm so it may not be intended for > non-x86_64 targets. Yes, I think it makes sense to just declare x86_64 as the only supported system. Unfortunately, most bioinfo packages pretend that x86_

Re: failing packages

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 01:38:32PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > bwa: > > fails on non-x86_64 targets. > > This package is part of bioinformatics.scm so it may not be intended for > > non-x86_64 targets. > > Pjotr, Ricardo: could you look into this and other bioinfo packages that > Efraim ment

Re: failing packages

Efraim Flashner skribis: > I've been looking at hydra.gnu.org a bit at some of the failing packages to > see what is causing them to fail. This list is far from complete, and is > based on eval #107275 on hydra. Thanks for looking into it! > bwa: > fails on non-x86_64 tar

failing packages

I've been looking at hydra.gnu.org a bit at some of the failing packages to see what is causing them to fail. This list is far from complete, and is based on eval #107275 on hydra. bwa: fails on non-x86_64 targets. This package is part of bioinformatics.scm so it may not be intended fo