Jonathan Brielmaier <jonathan.brielma...@web.de> skribis: > Am 22.06.2017 um 23:05 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: >> Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 06:20:54PM +0200, Jonathan Brielmaier wrote: >>>> copying and compiling to >>>> '/gnu/store/ld6h1fc696q6iaxi9pax0khnm747hvgi-guix-latest' with Guile >>>> 2.0.12... >>>> loading... 12.6% of 605 filesice-9/psyntax.scm:3084:32: In procedure >>>> #<procedure 4f831a0 (k filename)>: >>>> ice-9/psyntax.scm:3084:32: Syntax error: >>>> bytestructures/guile/base.scm:8:19: include-from-path: file not found in >>>> path in subform "bytestructures/r7/base.exports.sld" of >>>> (include-from-path "bytestructures/r7/base.exports.sld") >>>> builder for >>>> `/gnu/store/lh7ja8hk54rlx7q3hrch6726cgrsqr8j-guix-latest.drv' failed >>>> with exit code 1 >>>> guix pull: error: build failed: build of >>>> `/gnu/store/lh7ja8hk54rlx7q3hrch6726cgrsqr8j-guix-latest.drv' failed >>>> $ guix --version >>>> guix (GNU Guix) 20170303.14 >>>> >>>> guile-version: 2.0.12 >>> >>> This Guix was a bit old (from March 2017) and was using Guile 2.0 >>> instead of Guile 2.2. >>> >>> I'm not sure, but I'd guess the issue is related to the recent addition >>> of a dependency on guile-bytestructures [0]. >>> >>> [0] >>> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=19c90e5f697bbf1be5ea3a7b4f5fe712d77070a1 >> >> The problem is that there was a time window in March where >> ‘guile-bytestructures’ was broken as can be seen above. This prevents >> upgrade here. :-/ >> >> The workaround would be to first upgrade to the commit before the one >> you gave: >> >> guix pull \ >> >> --url=https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/snapshot/6fe5c49ab487154074eaab2ef80e9a2f8163320c.tar.gz >> >> and then upgrade again: >> >> guix pull >> >> Jonathan, are you able to confirm that this works or did you work around >> it differently already? > Sadly I can't confirm if this work around works because I reinstalled > guix (I removed the broken one and did a clean new 0.13 installation). > > Next time I'll wait until the mailing list gives me the right commit :)
No problem. I’m closing the bug, with the understanding though that it illustrates a “well-known” defect in ‘guix pull’. Thanks, Ludo’.
