Re: Mes 0.5 released

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Christopher Allan Webber writes:

> Wow... what a list...
>
> This is really incredible work!  Fully bootstrappable Guix is looking
> more and more feasible!

:-)
thanks!
--janneke

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl  

Problems running 'check-system'

[Chris Marusich]

Hi,

I'm having trouble running the system tests.  There are three issues:

Issue #1: I've noticed that I have to run 'make' before running 'make
check-system'.  An example will illustrate what I mean.

The following invocation fails in a clean checkout of master (in an
environment created via 'guix environment --pure guix'):

  ./bootstrap
  ./configure --localstatedir=/var
  make -j check-system TESTS=installed-os

It fails with this error message:

--8<---cut here---start->8---
[... some output omitted for brevity ...]

GUILEC   guix/scripts/copy.go
  GUILEC   guix/store/ssh.go
  GUILEC   guix/scripts/offload.go
  GUILEC   guix/config.go
  GUILEC   guix/tests.go
  GUILEC   guix/tests/http.go
;;; note: source file /home/marusich/guix/./build-aux/run-system-tests.scm
;;;   newer than compiled 
/home/marusich/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-LE-8-2.0/home/marusich/guix/build-aux/run-system-tests.scm.go
In execvp of git: No such file or directory
Running 1 system tests...
Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  66: 19 [call-with-prompt prompt0 ...]
In ice-9/eval.scm:
 432: 18 [eval # #]
In ice-9/r4rs.scm:
  90: 17 [dynamic-wind # ...]
In guix/store.scm:
1332: 16 [run-with-store # # # 
...]
In ice-9/r4rs.scm:
  39: 15 [call-with-values # ...]
In guix/monads.scm:
 376: 14 [# #]
 376: 13 [# #]
 376: 12 [# #]
In gnu/tests/install.scm:
 230: 11 [# #]
 142: 10 [# #]
In gnu/services.scm:
 268: 9 [# #]
In gnu/system.scm:
 275: 8 [# #]
In guix/gexp.scm:
 604: 7 [# #]
 487: 6 [# #]
 490: 5 [# #]
In guix/store.scm:
1252: 4 [# #]
In guix/packages.scm:
 806: 3 [cache! # # # ...]
1121: 2 [thunk]
1053: 1 [bag->derivation # # #]
In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
 575: 0 [map # ...]

srfi/srfi-1.scm:575:27: In procedure map:
srfi/srfi-1.scm:575:27: Throw to key `srfi-34' with args `(#)'.
make: *** [Makefile:5066: check-system] Error 1
[2] [env] marusich@garuda:~/guix
$ 
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

However, if I invoke 'make' first, then the "could not find bootstrap
binary" message does not show up, and the test proceeds to be run:

  ./bootstrap
  ./configure --localstatedir=/var
  make -j
  make -j check-system TESTS=installed-os

Is this expected?  I thought one of the benefits of using different
targets in a Makefile was so that you could invoke a specific target
(e.g., 'check-system') and only build the things necessary to run that
target.  It surprised me that I needed to also run the default target
first in this case.

Issue #2: even when I run 'make' first, the test fails.  It fails with
this message:

--8<---cut here---start->8---
[... some output omitted for brevity ...]

starting phase `copy-bootstrap-guile'
Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
 160: 13 [catch #t # ...]
In unknown file:
   ?: 12 [apply-smob/1 #]
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
  66: 11 [call-with-prompt prompt0 ...]
In ice-9/eval.scm:
 432: 10 [eval # #]
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
2412: 9 [save-module-excursion #]
4089: 8 [#]
1734: 7 [%start-stack load-stack #]
1739: 6 [#]
In unknown file:
   ?: 5 [primitive-load 
"/gnu/store/wgh83kqjif20wfdg56iz7bxk9d4xmlk0-guix-0.12.0-9.25a4+-guile-builder"]
In ice-9/eval.scm:
 387: 4 [eval # ()]
In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
 827: 3 [every1 # ...]
In 
/gnu/store/a42pfdz8w5qxdkp6xz8783ydywmp0p8p-module-import/guix/build/gnu-build-system.scm:
 653: 2 [# #]
In ice-9/eval.scm:
 432: 1 [eval # #]
In unknown file:
   ?: 0 [copy-file 
"/gnu/store/dgncc5wmw8prxq09y71hqjc6g7rxqvvb-guile-2.0.9.tar.xz" ...]

ERROR: In procedure copy-file:
ERROR: In procedure copy-file: Permission denied
note: keeping build directory `/tmp/guix-build-guix-0.12.0-9.25a4+.drv-1'
builder for 
`/gnu/store/hm9bfka04gjbzjah7ilk3hp998bzdvqv-guix-0.12.0-9.25a4+.drv' failed 
with exit code 1
@ build-failed 
/gnu/store/hm9bfka04gjbzjah7ilk3hp998bzdvqv-guix-0.12.0-9.25a4+.drv - 1 builder 
for `/gnu/store/hm9bfka04gjbzjah7ilk3hp998bzdvqv-guix-0.12.0-9.25a4+.drv' 
failed with exit code 1
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/1wc6ajd6mazb084ddl2mkpzcnkn42x2n-activate-service.drv': 1 
dependencies couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/h1aw5zf5z7n5f51xa4dm0hz5b5n75gdm-ca-certificate-bundle.drv': 1 
dependencies couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/lqkb3fxvqq7adakpgy5j4n6v05ycvd3n-fonts-dir.drv': 1 dependencies 
couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/xvjycblb25lyd80mpxhf4azikzjz74bv-info-dir.drv': 1 dependencies 
couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/n1dv7my6awklaplsk1j3j34dx5gqh3s1-manual-database.drv': 1 
dependencies couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/khj9qjc52vgqmqkrwmmhr5iqqnz5h19g-shepherd-guix-daemon.scm.drv': 1 
dependencies couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/azw92b3nf95gyqwx2lijzmqka43xfpn9-activate.drv': 1 dependencies 
couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 
`/gnu/store/91mp0bgpknv9i0x426m9w76pz4026qvn-profile.drv': 5 dependencies 
couldn't be built
cannot build derivation 

Re: potluck status

[Katherine Cox-Buday]

Andy Wingo  writes:

> I guess you would probably also want to to specify also a set of
> active channels for a given guix command; e.g. "guix package
> --channels=testing --install my-package".

Being able to work with packages at the level of granularity of channels
would be ah-mazing. So many possibilities there.

> As for Scala and sbt and everything -- I think potluck packages are most
> appropriate for "leaf" packages.  For packages that form
> "infrastructure" like sbt and all, I think you will probably want to
> integrate more closely in Guix.  But I don't know.

I agree! I brought up potluck because for Java-type things (scala and
sbt included) it is often very unclear how to tie it back to a
reproducible build (see Hartmut Goebel's herculean efforts with maven).
The idea that potluck makes it easy to get going and then provides an
easy way to share your in-progress work seemed to fit nicely.

> & as for dev/testing/prod/etc -- I have no idea :)  I'm not really an
> ops person, so I can only speculate, and anyone can do that as well as I
> can :)  I think with guix-potluck.org my main focus is to let people
> share work-in-progress Guix packages immediately.  I can imagine many
> ways this could relate to a sort of devopsy workflow but I can't pretend
> to be an expert here :)

Sorry, I didn't mean to be too dev-opsy. All I really meant is just like
we have a staging branch/channel now that eventually gets rolled into
master, we could have a dev branch/channel which is really unstable and
experimental, a staging branch/channel (which is test in my vernacular),
and master branch/channel (which is prod in my vernacular).

Potluck seemed appropriate for dev for the same reasons it seemed
appropriate for scala/sbt.

-- 
Katherine

Re: 01/02: gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.11.

[Leo Famulari]

On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 05:24:57PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> l...@famulari.name (Leo Famulari) writes:
> 
> > lfam pushed a commit to branch master
> > in repository guix.
> >
> > commit cfd2ca8244bc7a5c130677718ad2ad75f7316c68
> > Author: Mathieu Othacehe 
> > Date:   Mon May 1 11:41:21 2017 +0200
> >
> > gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.11.
> > 
> > * gnu/packages/linux.scm (%linux-libre-version): Update to 4.11.
> > (%linux-libre-hash): Update hash.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Leo Famulari 
> 
> This needs an updated configuration file as well, which I've been doing
> manually using "make oldconfig".  The package code looks for a
> configuration file in:
> 
>   gnu/packages/aux-files/linux-libre/-.conf
> 
> Since there is no such file for version 4.11, I guess maybe it will just
> use a default configuration from upstream?  I expect this will likely
> cause people some problems.
> 
> I think we should revert this until I can perform the update in my usual
> way, unless someone wants to take over maintenance of the kernel
> packages from me.

Agreed, thank you reverting quickly. I apologize for pushing this
without comparing it against earlier commits of the same type.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: 01/02: gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.11.

[Mathieu Othacehe]

Hi Mark,

> Since there is no such file for version 4.11, I guess maybe it will just
> use a default configuration from upstream?  I expect this will likely
> cause people some problems.

Sorry I didn't noticed that, I was too impatient to get 4.11 that fixes
boot related issues on one of my machines.

Feel free to revert.

Mathieu

Re: 01/02: gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.11.

[Mark H Weaver]

l...@famulari.name (Leo Famulari) writes:

> lfam pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository guix.
>
> commit cfd2ca8244bc7a5c130677718ad2ad75f7316c68
> Author: Mathieu Othacehe 
> Date:   Mon May 1 11:41:21 2017 +0200
>
> gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.11.
> 
> * gnu/packages/linux.scm (%linux-libre-version): Update to 4.11.
> (%linux-libre-hash): Update hash.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leo Famulari 

This needs an updated configuration file as well, which I've been doing
manually using "make oldconfig".  The package code looks for a
configuration file in:

  gnu/packages/aux-files/linux-libre/-.conf

Since there is no such file for version 4.11, I guess maybe it will just
use a default configuration from upstream?  I expect this will likely
cause people some problems.

I think we should revert this until I can perform the update in my usual
way, unless someone wants to take over maintenance of the kernel
packages from me.

  Mark

Re: Doc: reference to guix-devel for submitting patches

[myglc2]

>   export INFOPATH="$HOME/guix/doc${INFOPATH:+:}$INFOPATH"
>
> where $HOME/guix is my local checkout of Guix's Git repository.  This
> ensures that the manual I read using Emacs and the Info reader matches
> the Guix code I have checked out (after I've built it, of course).  Do
> you think it would be worth it if I added a small section about this to
> the "Contributing" section in the manual?  It seems to come up from time
> to time on the mailing list.

+1

Re: Suggest A debian-style menu system for guix

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Personally, I find .desktop files better suited for this. Place each of
them in "$HOME/.local/share/applications" directory.

More information about the FreeDesktop .desktop standard can be found
at:
[[https://specifications.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/]].

As it evidences, GNOME has adapted a similar format, which can be read
at
[[https://developer.gnome.org/integration-guide/stable/desktop-files.html]].