dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09

grozin
(Moving to gentoo-dev)

On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote:

> I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles
> (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine),
> it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly
> assumptions).  Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem but
> the package in question.
>
> Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix all
> the problematic packages is just silly.  This is basically saying that
> it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to fix them
> for you.  People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in the profile.
> Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages you like just
> because they happened to change the fragile conditions under which they
> worked.
See bug #672454.

clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided compilation
flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our problems for us.

clozurecl compiles and works fine (for me this means that it can compile
maxima and fricas, and they work) in the 13.0 profile. In the 17.0 one,
its compilation loops forever on ~x86; on ~amd64 it compiles, but does not
work properly (cannot compile maxima, bug #665364). So, the reason is in
the new compilation or linking flags introduced in 17.0.

Is it possible to compile one specific package with compilation/linking
flags closely following the 13.0 ones? How?

> That said, if you insist I'll fix this package.  But I'm pretty sure you
> won't like my fix.
If after this fix it will be able to compile maxima and fricas, and they
will work, that would be sufficient for me.

Andrey
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09

Michał Górny-5
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:02 +0700, [hidden email] wrote:

> (Moving to gentoo-dev)
>
> On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> > I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles
> > (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine),
> > it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly
> > assumptions).  Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem but
> > the package in question.
> >
> > Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix all
> > the problematic packages is just silly.  This is basically saying that
> > it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to fix them
> > for you.  People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in the profile.
> > Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages you like just
> > because they happened to change the fragile conditions under which they
> > worked.
>
> See bug #672454.
>
> clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided compilation
> flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our problems for us.
>
> clozurecl compiles and works fine (for me this means that it can compile
> maxima and fricas, and they work) in the 13.0 profile. In the 17.0 one,
> its compilation loops forever on ~x86; on ~amd64 it compiles, but does not
> work properly (cannot compile maxima, bug #665364). So, the reason is in
> the new compilation or linking flags introduced in 17.0.
>
> Is it possible to compile one specific package with compilation/linking
> flags closely following the 13.0 ones? How?
-fno-PIE, -fno-PIC are two potentially useful options.  Possibly more.
Once you figure out which of them is necessary, you should tell upstream
to append it instead of relying on unsafe compiler defaults.

>
> > That said, if you insist I'll fix this package.  But I'm pretty sure you
> > won't like my fix.
>
> If after this fix it will be able to compile maxima and fricas, and they
> will work, that would be sufficient for me.
>

No.  After this fix it will be gone, and people will be able to compile
maxima and fricas using a working clisp compiler.

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny

signature.asc (981 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09

Ulrich Mueller-2
In reply to this post by grozin
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, grozin  wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote:

>> I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles
>> (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine),
>> it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly
>> assumptions).  Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem
>> but the package in question.
>>
>> Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix
>> all the problematic packages is just silly.  This is basically saying
>> that it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to
>> fix them for you.  People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in
>> the profile.  Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages
>> you like just because they happened to change the fragile conditions
>> under which they worked.
Oh, come on. The 17.0 profiles introduced rather daring compiler and
linker options, and clozurecl is not the only package broken by them.
Most of the Lisp packages (including Emacs) are affected, because their
dumping of the executable is incompatible with PIE. That doesn't make
them "bad quality packages". It simply means that the PIE flags hadn't
previously been encountered upstream, or not reported to them.

> See bug #672454.

> clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided
> compilation flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our
> problems for us.

Still, you could report it upstream, maybe with a patch for their build
system?

Ulrich

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment