"Leo Famulari" <l...@famulari.name> writes: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025, at 03:41, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Hi. What do you mean by disabled isolation? In the initial e-mail I >> quoted the set of commands used which involved: >> >> (guix-daemon --disable-chroot --build-users-group=_guixbuild & >> >> Is that what you mean? > > Yes, I'm sorry I missed that and made you spell it out! > >> Is building things without build isolation not supposed to work? > > Not really. We do accept help patching upstream build scripts to fix > issues like this one, but I don't think anyone is regularly testing > Guix without the build chroot, and the warranty is definitely void > when Guix is used this way. I think that countless build will break > without the chroot, as build scripts will look for dependencies in the > "wrong" (i.e. non-Guixy) places.
Thank you for explaining! These internal things are still rather sktechy to me. It makes perfect sense now that I see it this way. Fortunately it seems that building images without --disable-chroot now appears to work for me (at least some of the time). Here is a successful arm64 Guix GitLab pipeline job where 'guix install' works: https://gitlab.com/debdistutils/guix/container-selftests/-/jobs/9305446937 That container image was built from a pure Guix container image, which in turn was built from a Debian+Guix container image. So I think my original request was simply a misunderstanding, closing... /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
