Hello,
Thanks Andy & Ricardo for the detailed explanations!
Andy Wingo skribis:
> It seems that this bug is related to the introduction of
> url-fetch/reset-patch-level. It takes a #:guile kwarg but defaults to
> #f; if not given #:guile, that #f propagates through instead of a
> package objec
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:34:55PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
> > What about Ricardo's "really gross fix"? [0] I don't understand it enough to
> > know why it's gross. If it works and does not break other things, at
> > least it could protect people who have not yet
Leo Famulari writes:
> What about Ricardo's "really gross fix"? [0] I don't understand it enough to
> know why it's gross. If it works and does not break other things, at
> least it could protect people who have not yet hit the bug, but will hit
> it the next time they run `guix pull`.
It’s gro
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:52:09AM +0100, Andy Wingo wrote:
> I think in the meantime it would be acceptable to insert an
>
> (unless guile
> (error "update your guix daemon from git and restart it (#25775)"))
>
> to url-fetch/reset-patch-level, or something like that. WDYT?
I think it wo
Hi,
It seems that this bug is related to the introduction of
url-fetch/reset-patch-level. It takes a #:guile kwarg but defaults to
#f; if not given #:guile, that #f propagates through instead of a
package object.
So one fix is here:
diff --git a/gnu/packages/bootstrap.scm b/gnu/packages/boots
