GNU bug report logs -
#26671
serf package (guix dependency) tests fail
Previous Next
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 26671 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 26671 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Wed, 26 Apr 2017 21:19:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
.
(Wed, 26 Apr 2017 21:19:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello Guix!
While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
(bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
There were 14 failures:
1) test_ssl_trust_rootca: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120199>
2) test_ssl_certificate_chain_with_anchor: test/test_util.c:438:
expected <0> but was <120199>
3) test_ssl_certificate_chain_all_from_server: test/test_util.c:438:
expected <0> but was <120199>
4) test_ssl_no_servercert_callback_allok: test/test_util.c:438:
expected <0> but was <120170>
5) test_ssl_large_response: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
6) test_ssl_large_request: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
7) test_ssl_client_certificate: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
was <120170>
8) test_ssl_future_server_cert: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
was <120199>
9) test_setup_ssltunnel: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
10) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth: test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0>
but was <120170>
11) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_server_has_keepalive_off:
test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
12) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_has_keepalive_off:
test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
13) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_close_conn_on_200resp:
test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
14) test_ssltunnel_digest_auth: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
was <120170>
!!!FAILURES!!!
Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
== Testing test/testcases/simple.response ==
== Testing test/testcases/chunked.response ==
== Testing test/testcases/deflate.response ==
== Testing test/testcases/chunked-trailers.response ==
== Testing test/testcases/chunked-empty.response ==
== Running the unit tests ==
ERROR: test(s) failed in test_all
scons: *** [check] Error 1
scons: building terminated because of errors.
phase `check' failed after 51.6 seconds
builder for `/gnu/store/sgavfd7s3f4xixvfhdqb2nn77fvbf63q-serf-1.3.8.drv'
failed with exit code 1
@ build-failed /gnu/store/sgavfd7s3f4xixvfhdqb2nn77fvbf63q-serf-1.3.8.drv
- 1 builder for
`/gnu/store/sgavfd7s3f4xixvfhdqb2nn77fvbf63q-serf-1.3.8.drv' failed
with exit code 1
guix build: error: build failed: build of
`/gnu/store/sgavfd7s3f4xixvfhdqb2nn77fvbf63q-serf-1.3.8.drv' failed
This particular output was triggered by runnnig "guix build --check
serf" on a foreign distro, but I also had serf test failures on
GuixSD.
Maxim
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 13:55:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Hello Guix!
>
> While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
> in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
> (bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
>
> ............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
>
> There were 14 failures:
> 1) test_ssl_trust_rootca: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120199>
> 2) test_ssl_certificate_chain_with_anchor: test/test_util.c:438:
> expected <0> but was <120199>
> 3) test_ssl_certificate_chain_all_from_server: test/test_util.c:438:
> expected <0> but was <120199>
> 4) test_ssl_no_servercert_callback_allok: test/test_util.c:438:
> expected <0> but was <120170>
> 5) test_ssl_large_response: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 6) test_ssl_large_request: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 7) test_ssl_client_certificate: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
> was <120170>
> 8) test_ssl_future_server_cert: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
> was <120199>
> 9) test_setup_ssltunnel: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 10) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth: test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0>
> but was <120170>
> 11) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_server_has_keepalive_off:
> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 12) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_has_keepalive_off:
> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 13) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_close_conn_on_200resp:
> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
> 14) test_ssltunnel_digest_auth: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
> was <120170>
>
> !!!FAILURES!!!
> Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
The SSL certificates in "test/server" expired 18/04.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
I'll try to port this patch, but "viewvc" can't give binary diffs, so
will have to clone it locally first.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Hello Guix!
>>
>> While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
>> in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
>> (bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
>>
>> ............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
>>
>> There were 14 failures:
>> 1) test_ssl_trust_rootca: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120199>
>> 2) test_ssl_certificate_chain_with_anchor: test/test_util.c:438:
>> expected <0> but was <120199>
>> 3) test_ssl_certificate_chain_all_from_server: test/test_util.c:438:
>> expected <0> but was <120199>
>> 4) test_ssl_no_servercert_callback_allok: test/test_util.c:438:
>> expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 5) test_ssl_large_response: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 6) test_ssl_large_request: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 7) test_ssl_client_certificate: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>> was <120170>
>> 8) test_ssl_future_server_cert: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>> was <120199>
>> 9) test_setup_ssltunnel: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 10) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth: test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0>
>> but was <120170>
>> 11) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_server_has_keepalive_off:
>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 12) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_has_keepalive_off:
>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 13) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_close_conn_on_200resp:
>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>> 14) test_ssltunnel_digest_auth: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>> was <120170>
>>
>> !!!FAILURES!!!
>> Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
>
> The SSL certificates in "test/server" expired 18/04.
>
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
>
> I'll try to port this patch, but "viewvc" can't give binary diffs, so
> will have to clone it locally first.
Apparently "patch" does not yet support binary diffs either:
patching file test/test_buckets.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 1232 (offset -91 lines).
patching file test/server/serfcacert.pem
File test/server/serfclientcert.p12: git binary diffs are not supported.
patching file test/server/serfrootcacert.pem
patching file test/server/serfserver_expired_cert.pem
patching file test/server/serfserver_future_cert.pem
patching file test/server/serfservercert.pem
patching file test/server/serfserverkey.pem
source is under 'serf-1.3.8'
applying '/gnu/store/qbh97afjjgkn332f8ncn6k8pg74wfc8w-serf-comment-style-fix.patch'...
applying '/gnu/store/vk533j8s56nhlzz2hnqn853xb9yl6b6y-serf-update-test-certificates.patch'...
builder for `/gnu/store/3kcz9as8i986fxqj368n6cg3k7nhj7cq-serf-1.3.8.tar.xz.drv' failed to produce output path `/gnu/store/n4479kx0qx8rblzqnwgxg7jnp1x1xyjh-serf-1.3.8.tar.xz'
I'll try to run `git apply` in a phase instead, although that will
almost double the reverse dependencies of "git".
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:40:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
> Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Hello Guix!
>>>
>>> While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
>>> in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
>>> (bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
>>>
>>> ............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
>>>
>>> There were 14 failures:
>>> 1) test_ssl_trust_rootca: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120199>
>>> 2) test_ssl_certificate_chain_with_anchor: test/test_util.c:438:
>>> expected <0> but was <120199>
>>> 3) test_ssl_certificate_chain_all_from_server: test/test_util.c:438:
>>> expected <0> but was <120199>
>>> 4) test_ssl_no_servercert_callback_allok: test/test_util.c:438:
>>> expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 5) test_ssl_large_response: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 6) test_ssl_large_request: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 7) test_ssl_client_certificate: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>>> was <120170>
>>> 8) test_ssl_future_server_cert: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>>> was <120199>
>>> 9) test_setup_ssltunnel: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 10) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth: test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0>
>>> but was <120170>
>>> 11) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_server_has_keepalive_off:
>>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 12) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_has_keepalive_off:
>>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 13) test_ssltunnel_basic_auth_proxy_close_conn_on_200resp:
>>> test/test_context.c:2116: expected <0> but was <120170>
>>> 14) test_ssltunnel_digest_auth: test/test_util.c:438: expected <0> but
>>> was <120170>
>>>
>>> !!!FAILURES!!!
>>> Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
>>
>> The SSL certificates in "test/server" expired 18/04.
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
>>
>> I'll try to port this patch, but "viewvc" can't give binary diffs, so
>> will have to clone it locally first.
>
> Apparently "patch" does not yet support binary diffs either:
>
> patching file test/test_buckets.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1232 (offset -91 lines).
> patching file test/server/serfcacert.pem
> File test/server/serfclientcert.p12: git binary diffs are not supported.
> patching file test/server/serfrootcacert.pem
> patching file test/server/serfserver_expired_cert.pem
> patching file test/server/serfserver_future_cert.pem
> patching file test/server/serfservercert.pem
> patching file test/server/serfserverkey.pem
> source is under 'serf-1.3.8'
> applying '/gnu/store/qbh97afjjgkn332f8ncn6k8pg74wfc8w-serf-comment-style-fix.patch'...
> applying '/gnu/store/vk533j8s56nhlzz2hnqn853xb9yl6b6y-serf-update-test-certificates.patch'...
> builder for `/gnu/store/3kcz9as8i986fxqj368n6cg3k7nhj7cq-serf-1.3.8.tar.xz.drv' failed to produce output path `/gnu/store/n4479kx0qx8rblzqnwgxg7jnp1x1xyjh-serf-1.3.8.tar.xz'
>
> I'll try to run `git apply` in a phase instead, although that will
> almost double the reverse dependencies of "git".
Never mind, "serf" is already a dependency of git (through
"subversion"), so this did not work very well..
Perhaps we could have a "git-minimal" for cases like this? I suppose
that could be useful for "git-fetch" as well. I'll give that a go
shortly, unless there are better suggestions.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:59:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 04:19:18PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote:
> Apparently "patch" does not yet support binary diffs either:
>
> patching file test/test_buckets.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1232 (offset -91 lines).
> patching file test/server/serfcacert.pem
> File test/server/serfclientcert.p12: git binary diffs are not supported.
Perhaps we should avoid using binary patches in Guix, but I think you
could use a patch with a binary diff by passing '--binary' to
(patch-flags). I haven't tested it, however.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 15:05:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 03:54:13PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote:
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
> > in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
> > (bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
> >
> > ............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
[...]
> > !!!FAILURES!!!
> > Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
>
> The SSL certificates in "test/server" expired 18/04.
Terrible! This invalidates the entire dependency tree based on serf. In
effect, it enforces an expiration date on these packages.
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
Rather than using this workaround, which will stop working 2018-09-19,
we should disable this test. We should also file an upstream bug asking
them to fudge the date in their tests, so that we can run this test
suite forever. GnuTLS uses this technique with the 'datefudge' tool.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 15:17:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 03:54:13PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote:
>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> >
>> > While attempting to "guix environment guix" after doing a "git pull"
>> > in my guix checkout (master), it attempted to build many packages
>> > (bash, gcc, etc.) and failed building `serf' due to test failures:
>> >
>> > ............F.FFF.FFF.FF.FFFFF...................................
>
> [...]
>
>> > !!!FAILURES!!!
>> > Runs: 65 Passes: 51 Fails: 14
>>
>> The SSL certificates in "test/server" expired 18/04.
>
> Terrible! This invalidates the entire dependency tree based on serf. In
> effect, it enforces an expiration date on these packages.
Good point. We should definitely avoid this.
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
>
> Rather than using this workaround, which will stop working 2018-09-19,
> we should disable this test. We should also file an upstream bug asking
> them to fudge the date in their tests, so that we can run this test
> suite forever. GnuTLS uses this technique with the 'datefudge' tool.
Interesting, I was not aware of "datefudge".
I'll disable these tests for now and create an upstream issue once I've
learned more about the datefudge tool.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:02:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
>>
>> Rather than using this workaround, which will stop working 2018-09-19,
>> we should disable this test. We should also file an upstream bug asking
>> them to fudge the date in their tests, so that we can run this test
>> suite forever. GnuTLS uses this technique with the 'datefudge' tool.
>
> Interesting, I was not aware of "datefudge".
>
> I'll disable these tests for now and create an upstream issue once I've
> learned more about the datefudge tool.
I disabled these tests in decb4c26fa1c748b118e33495d5493d84a6ca6c9 and
also pushed an update for 1.3.9.
Leaving this bug open until the upstream issue is created so it can be
added here as a reference.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#26671
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 27 Apr 2017 17:14:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 26671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On April 27, 2017 9:01:35 AM PDT, Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> wrote:
>Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
>> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1792234
>>>
>>> Rather than using this workaround, which will stop working
>2018-09-19,
>>> we should disable this test. We should also file an upstream bug
>asking
>>> them to fudge the date in their tests, so that we can run this test
>>> suite forever. GnuTLS uses this technique with the 'datefudge' tool.
>>
>> Interesting, I was not aware of "datefudge".
>>
>> I'll disable these tests for now and create an upstream issue once
>I've
>> learned more about the datefudge tool.
>
>I disabled these tests in decb4c26fa1c748b118e33495d5493d84a6ca6c9 and
>also pushed an update for 1.3.9.
>
>Leaving this bug open until the upstream issue is created so it can be
>added here as a reference.
Thanks! :)
Reply sent
to
Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 08 May 2017 11:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 08 May 2017 11:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #34 received at 26671-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
> Leaving this bug open until the upstream issue is created so it can be
> added here as a reference.
Filed here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SERF-184
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:24:06 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 6 years and 298 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.