Yes, though interestingly I can't reproduce in a development tree at the commit used when I submitted the report (9f9520a1299fccd8508d03ce0c9280c6e0030207). In summary:
Error occurs: 1. In 9f9520a1299fccd8508d03ce0c9280c6e0030207 2. In 00386d3430f12710997f17091a55c07323ff138c 3. In 00386d3430f12710997f17091a55c07323ff138c after running guix pull once again (this did cause a rebuild of compute-guix-derivation) Error does not occur: In the Guix source tree (using the pre-inst-env script) @ 9f9520a1299fccd8508d03ce0c9280c6e0030207 Would it be useful to compare the hashes for packages I build manually to hashes of the packages from the substitute server? If so, what packages should I check and what's the easiest way (and is guix challenge useful in this situation [forgive me, I'm pretty unfamiliar with debugging this kind of error in Guix])? On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:38 AM Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> wrote: > > If you run 'guix pull' again do you still get the same errors? > > -- > Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר > GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 > Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
