bug-guix
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#28057: assert-node-has-guix should fail gracefully


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: bug#28057: assert-node-has-guix should fail gracefully
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:10:23 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)

Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> skribis:

> I have a couple of servers where offloading doesn’t quite work for as
> yet unknown reasons.  “guix offload test” crashes instead of telling me
> what’s wrong:
>
> address@hidden ~/maintenance# guix offload test
> guix offload: testing 3 build machines defined in '/etc/guix/machines.scm'...
> guix offload: '192.168.0.2' is running guile (GNU Guile) 2.2.2
> guix offload: '192.168.0.3' is running guile (GNU Guile) 2.2.2
> guix offload: '192.168.0.12' is running guile (GNU Guile) 2.2.2
> guix offload: Guix is usable on '192.168.0.2' (test returned 
> "/gnu/store/883yjkl46dxw9mzykykmbs0yzwyxm17z-test")
> guix offload: Guix is usable on '192.168.0.3' (test returned 
> "/gnu/store/883yjkl46dxw9mzykykmbs0yzwyxm17z-test")
> Backtrace:
>            7 (primitive-load "/gnu/store/gkv8zl774h2qpa89mrf6d74fry3…")
> In guix/ui.scm:
>   1352:12  6 (run-guix-command _ . _)
> In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>     837:9  5 (catch _ _ #<procedure 7f6793a209a8 at guix/ui.scm:450…> …)
>     837:9  4 (catch _ _ #<procedure 7f6793a209c0 at guix/ui.scm:538…> …)
> In guix/scripts/offload.scm:
>     611:6  3 (check-machine-availability _ _)
> In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
>    656:11  2 (for-each #<procedure assert-node-has-guix (node name)> …)
> In guix/scripts/offload.scm:
>     543:2  1 (assert-node-has-guix _ "192.168.0.12")
> In ssh/dist/node.scm:
>     397:8  0 (node-eval #<node address@hidden:22/37146 e01600> _)
>
> ssh/dist/node.scm:397:8: In procedure node-eval:
> ssh/dist/node.scm:397:8: Throw to key `node-repl-error' with args 
> `("Evaluation failed" "scheme@(guile-user)> While compiling 
> expression:\nERROR: no code for module (guix)" ())'.
>
> This error should be caught and the message be printed without the stack
> trace.

Fixed in 5a5e34e3588e863de0028523ada61041e78cf8c6, thanks.

Ludo’.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]