[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#41116: Guix deploy fails with new version of Herd
From: |
Marius Bakke |
Subject: |
bug#41116: Guix deploy fails with new version of Herd |
Date: |
Fri, 08 May 2020 15:44:18 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Notmuch/0.29.3 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/26.3 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
Diego Nicola Barbato <address@hidden> writes:
> Hey,
>
> Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Hello Alex & Marius,
>>
>> Marius Bakke <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> Alex Sassmannshausen via Bug reports for GNU Guix <address@hidden>
>>> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I maintain a number of servers using Guix deploy. It seems that the
>>>> recent upgrade to Herd in Guix, and specifically commit
>>>> 4c0cc7bed3de2c0e2d3a6e95b88693941e839eec might have introduced a bug.
>>>>
>>>> From my testing, guix deploy currently consistently fails with:
>>>> -----------------8<----------------------------->8-------------------
>>>> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1667:16: In procedure raise-exception:
>>>> ERROR:
>>>> 1. &inferior-exception:
>>>> arguments: (srfi-34 #<inferior-object #<condition
>>>> &action-exception-error [service: root action: eval key:
>>>> keyword-argument-error args: ("#<procedure 7fe24816e240 at
>>>> shepherd/service.scm:903:4 (command #:key user group directory
>>>> environment-variables pid-file pid-file-timeout log-file) | (program .
>>>> program-args)>" "Unrecognized keyword" () (#:file-creation-mask))]
>>>> 7eff2bd7be00>>)
>>>> inferior: #f
>>>> stack: ()
>>>> -----------------8<----------------------------->8-------------------
>>>>
>>>> A workaround is to build the system configuration locally on the target
>>>> server, then to reconfigure. It will still error at the same place, but
>>>> at this point, after restarting the server, the new version of Herd will
>>>> be running and both deploy and reconfigure will work.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know what a good solution to this could be, but it may be
>>>> something we need to consider in future development of Herd.
>>>
>>> This issue has been reported by a number of users on IRC. I think the
>>> problem is that the the #:file-creation-mask keyword requires support
>>> from the running Shepherd, which may not have it yet. I think we should
>>> revert commit 4c0cc7bed3de2c0e2d3a6e95b88693941e839eec until we find a
>>> smooth upgrade path. Can you try it and push if that fixes guix deploy?
>>
>> I’ve reverted the patch in 5aa4d2dcf2f4f8786358feb45338893ed08a4cd9.
>>
>> Diego: I guess we can reinstate the patch “later”, once Shepherd 0.8 can
>> be considered widespread.
>
> I'm sorry I broke reconfigure and deploy. I didn't consider testing
> upgrading from before Shepherd 0.8 to after my change and I didn't even
> think of deploy. Going forth I'll leave messing with core functionality
> to the pros.
Mistakes happen, don't worry about it.
One thing that would be really useful and can prevent such situations in
the future is to have a "system test" that tries to run reconfigure from
the latest released version of Guix (currently 1.1.0).
There are already a few Shepherd tests in gnu/tests/base.scm and
gnu/tests/reconfigure.scm that can be used as inspiration.
Food for thought, patches welcome, etc. :-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
bug#41116: A naive proposal for a solution, Alex Sassmannshausen, 2020/05/06