| 26 Oct 2021 |
 das_j | For reference, this is the commit: https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commit/a6eaee501f6ec0c152abe88640203a64c390993e | 21:12:12 |
| das_j | Redacted or Malformed Event | 21:20:39 |
| das_j | I'll open a bug report on coreutils-bugs | 21:21:21 |
| das_j | 
Download image.png | 21:46:13 |
| das_j | Is there anything anyone wants to add/change here? | 21:46:19 |
 Ryan Burns | Are we sure that peertube is the same problem? I wouldn't want to confuse them if it is not actually related | 21:47:07 |
 Vladimír Čunát | Is there evidence that peertube is broken by the same coreutils commit? | 21:47:15 |
| das_j | Good point | 21:47:23 |
| das_j | And alacritty was Darwin, that might also be caused by another commit | 21:48:04 |
| Vladimír Čunát | If the commit can be reverted on release without conflicts (after stripping NEWS), it shouldn't be that hard to verify both. | 21:49:24 |
|  moritz.hedtke joined the room. | 21:49:24 |
| das_j | I can try on Darwin | 21:49:46 |
| Vladimír Čunát | (without messing with coreutils dependencies) | 21:49:50 |
| Vladimír Čunát | I can check peertube tomorrow on the same Linux system; seems easy if it applies. | 21:51:19 |
| Vladimír Čunát | Oh and I see a "coretuils" typo in the e-mail :-) | 21:52:17 |
| moritz.hedtke | Is there already a diff then I could also test peertube with that commit reverted. Considering that I could build with (likely just) another -frandom-seed I don't believe that's the issue but I could still verify. | 21:54:09 |
| moritz.hedtke | I can also create it myself doesn't seem that hard | 21:54:32 |
| moritz.hedtke | Ohh I think we can't really verify whether its the revert then or a compiler bug as this also changes the -frandom-seed | 22:01:57 |
| das_j | oh oof, right | 22:02:20 |
| moritz.hedtke | Is there a revert with fixed conflicts because I don't like the conflicts | 22:02:52 |
| moritz.hedtke | * Is there a revert with fixed conflicts because I don't like the conflicts? | 22:02:56 |
| das_j | I tried with interdiff and failed | 22:05:45 |
| das_j | you could `substituteInPlace src/copy.c --replace SEEK_HOLE 0? | 22:06:21 |
| das_j | * you could substituteInPlace src/copy.c --replace SEEK_HOLE 0 | 22:06:24 |
| das_j | ah wait its ifdef | 22:06:40 |
| das_j | --replace "ifdef SEEK_HOLE" "if 0" is probably safer | 22:06:57 |
| Ryan Burns | maybe just #undef it at the top | 22:07:06 |
| Ryan Burns | well after the relevant includes | 22:07:16 |
| moritz.hedtke | to be more idiot safe I just removed the whole sections (so played compiler a bit) | 22:09:12 |
| das_j | looking at the SEEK_DATA macro we can probably just build without it until this is fixed | 22:13:26 |
