On February 7, 2017 4:08:06 PM GMT+02:00, l...@gnu.org wrote: >Hi, > >Sergei Trofimovich <sly...@inbox.ru> skribis: > >> It looks like 'guix environment' does not handles >derivations-as-files. >> I don't know if it's a bug in the package or 'guix environment': >> >> $ ls -l /gnu/store/i1139n4ab0fn9v4bwkvqzp6sw3w66mqr-python-waf-1.9.5 >> -r-xr-xr-x 2 root root 99280 Jan 1 1970 >/gnu/store/i1139n4ab0fn9v4bwkvqzp6sw3w66mqr-python-waf-1.9.5 >> >> $ ./pre-inst-env guix environment mpv >> The following derivation will be built: >> /gnu/store/b5ph69m9z0qgwkf1w1p39r3wyab6x4hi-profile.drv >> Backtrace: >> In ice-9/boot-9.scm: >> 160: 14 [catch #t #<catch-closure 8cad00> ...] >> In unknown file: >> ?: 13 [apply-smob/1 #<catch-closure 8cad00>] >> In ice-9/boot-9.scm: >> 66: 12 [call-with-prompt prompt0 ...] >> In ice-9/eval.scm: >> 432: 11 [eval # #] >> In ice-9/boot-9.scm: >> 2404: 10 [save-module-excursion #<procedure 8ea7c0 at >ice-9/boot-9.scm:4051:3 ()>] >> 4056: 9 [#<procedure 8ea7c0 at ice-9/boot-9.scm:4051:3 ()>] >> 1727: 8 [%start-stack load-stack #<procedure 8fcba0 at >ice-9/boot-9.scm:4047:10 ()>] >> 1732: 7 [#<procedure 8fd6f0 ()>] >> In unknown file: >> ?: 6 [primitive-load >"/gnu/store/yax60hx75hyarsfpraplhhfhkaqs30ia-profile-builder"] >> In ./guix/build/profiles.scm: >> 133: 5 [build-profile >"/gnu/store/dd9fznm75rdjkdhb4zqz67lvr8d1ya5d-profile" # ...] >> In ./guix/build/union.scm: >> 136: 4 [union-of-directories >"/gnu/store/dd9fznm75rdjkdhb4zqz67lvr8d1ya5d-profile" ...] >> In srfi/srfi-1.scm: >> 613: 3 [for-each #<procedure a86c80 at ./guix/build/union.scm:136:16 >(dir)> #] >> In ./guix/build/union.scm: >> 138: 2 [#<procedure a86c80 at ./guix/build/union.scm:136:16 (dir)> >"/gnu/store/i1139n4ab0fn9v4bwkvqzp6sw3w66mqr-python-waf-1.9.5"] >> 37: 1 [files-in-directory >"/gnu/store/i1139n4ab0fn9v4bwkvqzp6sw3w66mqr-python-waf-1.9.5"] >> In unknown file: >> ?: 0 [opendir >"/gnu/store/i1139n4ab0fn9v4bwkvqzp6sw3w66mqr-python-waf-1.9.5"] >> >> ERROR: In procedure opendir: >> ERROR: In procedure opendir: Not a directory > >I think you’re right: there are 2 bugs here. :-) > >Packages should definitely produce a directory, not a flat file. In >this case, the package should be a directory containing ‘bin/waf’ I >think. 宋文武 & Efraim, WDYT? >
I dont feel strongly about it, but it would be more consistent if it were inside a bin directory. We'd have to change the few places that we call waf and substitute the one we have packaged. >The second thing is a bug in ‘guix environment’. It should not >manifest >itself normally, but it’s worth fixing. > >Thanks, >Ludo’. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
