bug#23056: (no subject)

[Ludovic Courtès]

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:

> So what happens is that (1) substitutes were not available for the
> ‘guix’ package, which is why it ended up being built, and (2) /tmp is
> indeed a FUSE file system on the installation image (unionfs), hence the
> weird FUSE things that get in the way when running the tests.

Fixed in ee03b75dfb3399f41002c38ac512473ab94afa74 by simply making /tmp
a tmpfs.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

bug#23056: (no subject)

[Bartosz Duszel]

Hello all,
Had the same issue. Mounting as tmpfs helped. @Kei - thanks for sharing.

Best regards,
dptd

> On 22 Mar 2016, at 23:34, Ludovic Courtès  wrote:
> 
> k...@openmailbox.org skribis:
> 
>> On 2016-03-21 18:50, l...@gnu.org wrote:
>>> Kei  skribis:
>>> 
 I've managed to get guix to build by running
 
  mount -t tmpfs tmp /tmp
 
 prior to building. I've tried it on two separate hard drives.
>>> 
>>> OK, good.
>>> 
 Perhaps you can try and replicate my results?
>>> 
>>> No, I’d really need to know the answer to the questions at
>>>  to understand.
>>> :-)
>>> 
>>> Ludo’.
>> 
>> guix-daemon reported itself as version 0.9.0
>> Prior to my mounting /tmp as tmpfs, /tmp was just a folder under /.
>> These details can be seen by using the GuixSD x86_64 USB install image.
> 
> Oooh, I see.  I hadn’t realized this happened while running the 0.9.0
> installation image.
> 
> So what happens is that (1) substitutes were not available for the
> ‘guix’ package, which is why it ended up being built, and (2) /tmp is
> indeed a FUSE file system on the installation image (unionfs), hence the
> weird FUSE things that get in the way when running the tests.
> 
> I’ll see what can be done.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Ludo’.
> 
> 
> 

bug#23056: (no subject)

[Ludovic Courtès]

k...@openmailbox.org skribis:

> On 2016-03-21 18:50, l...@gnu.org wrote:
>> Kei  skribis:
>>
>>> I've managed to get guix to build by running
>>>
>>>   mount -t tmpfs tmp /tmp
>>>
>>> prior to building. I've tried it on two separate hard drives.
>>
>> OK, good.
>>
>>> Perhaps you can try and replicate my results?
>>
>> No, I’d really need to know the answer to the questions at
>>  to understand.
>> :-)
>>
>> Ludo’.
>
> guix-daemon reported itself as version 0.9.0
> Prior to my mounting /tmp as tmpfs, /tmp was just a folder under /.
> These details can be seen by using the GuixSD x86_64 USB install image.

Oooh, I see.  I hadn’t realized this happened while running the 0.9.0
installation image.

So what happens is that (1) substitutes were not available for the
‘guix’ package, which is why it ended up being built, and (2) /tmp is
indeed a FUSE file system on the installation image (unionfs), hence the
weird FUSE things that get in the way when running the tests.

I’ll see what can be done.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

bug#23056: (no subject)

[kei]

On 2016-03-21 18:50, l...@gnu.org wrote:

Kei  skribis:


I've managed to get guix to build by running

  mount -t tmpfs tmp /tmp

prior to building. I've tried it on two separate hard drives.


OK, good.


Perhaps you can try and replicate my results?


No, I’d really need to know the answer to the questions at
 to understand.
:-)

Ludo’.


guix-daemon reported itself as version 0.9.0
Prior to my mounting /tmp as tmpfs, /tmp was just a folder under /.
These details can be seen by using the GuixSD x86_64 USB install image.

bug#23056: (no subject)

[Ludovic Courtès]

Kei  skribis:

> I've managed to get guix to build by running
>
>   mount -t tmpfs tmp /tmp
>
> prior to building. I've tried it on two separate hard drives.

OK, good.

> Perhaps you can try and replicate my results?

No, I’d really need to know the answer to the questions at
 to understand.
:-)

Ludo’.

bug#23056: (no subject)

[Kei]

I've managed to get guix to build by running

  mount -t tmpfs tmp /tmp

prior to building. I've tried it on two separate hard drives.
Perhaps you can try and replicate my results?

Kei