Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> writes:
> tags 61882 +notabug > quit I don't think notabug applies until we actually know the root cause. > Hello, > > Csepp <raingl...@riseup.net> writes: > >> (Jump forward a bit, this is a bit stream-of-consciousness-y, I >> wrote >> things down as I was debugging things. TLDR: profile got corrupted >> somehow, it's not related to the packages themselves.) >> >> Certain packages like flatpak do not get installed in my main user >> profile for some unknown reason. >> So far they are: >> * gallery-dl >> * flatpak >> * emacs-org-roam >> >> It has been happening for at least a month across several pulls. >> >> If I export a manifest and load it in either guix shell -m or guix >> package -m to a different profile, bin/flatpak exists, if I do guix >> package -m without a profile argument or with the profile set to the >> default user profile, bin/flatpak is missing. >> >> The packages that are broken are always the same. >> >> If I create a manifest with only the broken packages, guix package >> -I >> reports exactly those packages, but when I look in >> ~/.guix-profile/bin >> it still has a bunch of other packages in it. >> >> So it seems the profile is frozen? I have no idea how this could >> happen. >> >> guix package --list-generations reports three generations, but there >> is >> only one generation in my home directory, called >> .guix-profile-1-link. >> >> There is also a .guix-profile.lock, maybe that's related? >> I see no lock for the other profile with the same manifest. >> >> Removed the lock, tried guix package -m again, still don't have >> flatpak, >> still only one generation symlink. >> >> Deleted all the symlinks, ran guix package -m, now it works. >> >> I'm gonna hold off on running the GC for a few days, if anyone has >> an >> idea of where the bug is and wants me to upload some files, I can do >> it >> until then. >> For my own reference, this is the store item of the broken profile: >> /gnu/store/0w3jxl95cchxn14zph3lmnqwmijf8971-profile > > Did you have any corruption at the FS level or something equally bad? > Were you using a different Guix in between the 'guix package -m' > attempts? If the profile was in the cache, it wouldn't rebuild it, > and you'd be stuck with your broken version. > > I'm closing this, as I we don't have much to push the > investigation further, but if you have a more precise idea of what > happened and ways to reproduce that do reopen. I'm pretty sure I already went through these, but once again, to be sure: - no there was no file system corruption as far as I could tell - store was checked for corruption multiple times - the issue persisted through multiple guix pulls - only one profile was affected
