Hi,
As Ian pointed out earlier, here some “guix pull” bugs:
55066
58309 closed
61520 closed
62023 closed
62830
And most of them are transient or hard to reproduce. More had been
listed in [1], it reads:
63451
63830
64489
64659 v1.4.0
64753
64963
And it’s often the same: transient or hard to reproduce. Here a larger
collection continuing…
64753
65495
65549
65560 v1.4.0
66600 v1.4.0
67035
67179 v1.2.0
67482
67806 v1.4.0
67956 v1.2.0
67965 v1.4.0
68397 v1.4.0
69127 v1.4.0
69334
69726 v1.3.0
70075 v1.3.0
70192
70200 v1.4.0
70201 v1.4.0
70297 v1.3.0
70646 v1.4.0
70649
70650 v1.4.0
70651
70658 v1.4.0
70667
70681 v1.3.0
70940
71426
71437 v1.4.0
71691 v1.4.0
71908
71945
72028 v1.4.0
72100
72135 upgrade from v1.2.0
72332 v1.4.0
72353 v1.4.0
72563 v1.4.0
72639 v1.4.0
Please note v1.4.0 means the host revision was v1.4.0.
After looking at some of these, we have 3 classes of bugs:
1. transient
2. pulling from too old host revision
3. mix of both
IMHO, the next actions are:
a) Replace this message:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(message (format #f "You found a bug: the program '~a'
failed to compute the derivation for Guix (version: ~s; system: ~s;
host version: ~s; pull-version: ~s).
Please report the COMPLETE output above by email to <~a>.~%"
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
by something like: “sorry, could you try again guix pull --commit=~s
and report if it fails again.”
b) Put here and there some logging [2] information. Patch#68946 [2]
provides logging facilities but is missing concrete user.
It could be worth to have it. So then, once “guix pull” fails, we
could ask to re-run “guix pull --commit=<target> --log-level=debug”.
This would help in having some information at failure time instead
of asking them after.
Moreover, it would provide information in order to diagnose all
these transient errors and see if they could be catched up instead
of erroring.
WDYT?
In all cases, feel free to pick one or more bugs from the list above and
investigate. Many do not have any answer – which is not welcoming and
friendly.
Cheers,
simon
1: collection of “guix pull“ bug reports
Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com>
Wed, 23 Aug 2023 18:17:20 +0200
id:86jztl20of....@gmail.com
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-08
https://yhetil.org/guix/86jztl20of....@gmail.com
2: [bug#68946] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Add logging capability to Guix
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com>
Mon, 05 Feb 2024 23:12:00 -0500
id:cover.1707192720.git.maxim.courno...@gmail.com
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/68946
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/cover.1707192720.git.maxim.courno...@gmail.com
https://yhetil.org/guix/cover.1707192720.git.maxim.courno...@gmail.com
