On 11/11/2017 at 23:02 Ludovic Courtès writes: > myglc2 <myg...@gmail.com> skribis: > >> On 11/10/2017 at 00:04 Ludovic Courtès writes: >>> >>> Thrilled by this idea, I pushed an unbound-variable handler that can >>> provide hints, such as: >>> >>> configuration.scm:88:19: zip: unbound variable >>> hint: Try adding `(use-modules (gnu packages compression))'. >>> >>> Feedback welcome! >> >> I built and played with this. If I follow some of the hints literally >> they lead me astray. Here are some suggested hint rewording. > > Again, it’s a hint, it could be wrong. > > So perhaps that’s a good reason for “Did you mean xyz?”, ending with a > question mark (like GCC does), rather than a sentence that looks > assertive. > > In the example above, it may be less confusing if we write: > > Did you forget (use-modules …)? > > With the question mark, the user understands that this may or may not be > the cause of the error. > > Thoughts? > Hi Ludo’,
I have lost your context here. But if you mean that in e.g., ... > *** test2: "NON EXISTANT PACKAGE MODULE (qemu) for qemu PACKAGE SPECIFIED" > > The error messages ... > > /root/ctest/test2:4:0: error: module (gnu packages qemu) not found > hint: Try adding `(use-package-modules virtualization)'. > > ... are followed literally in test2.fix, which does not fix the > problem because the stale and non-existant 'qemu' package module > reference also needs to be removed. > > Maybe a better hint would be ... > > hint: Remove the reference to the pachage module that was not > hint: found and add `(use-package-modules virtualization)'. ... something like ... hint: Did you remove reference to package module that was not found? hint: Did you forget `(use-package-modules virtualization)'? ... may be less confusing ... I agree. HTH - George
