guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: proposal: make build failures explicit results in the store


From: Florian Paul Schmidt
Subject: Re: proposal: make build failures explicit results in the store
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:19:58 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 11/25/2015 02:22 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> address@hidden (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
> 
>> You can run the Guix daemon with the switch --cache-failures and
>> it will do pretty much exactly what you want. :-)
> 
> Yep.

Thanks for your helpful comments, Taylan and Ludovic.. I changed the
guix-service's configuration on the machine to have the
- --cache-failures option then and restarted the whole build procedure.

> 
>> (I'm not sure whether it actually puts the failures into
>> /gnu/store in some format, so "pretty much.")
> 
> Technically, nothing is left behind in /gnu/store, but the database
> (by default /var/guix/db/db.sqlite) records the derivation as
> failed.  You can use ‘guix gc --clear-failures xxx’ to remove that
> mark.

Oh, I wasn't even aware there was a DB. I had a more functional
picture in mind where there was a map

package definition -> entr(y|ies) in store

where "package definition" transitively also encompassed all inputs,
etc, where "entry in store" was a somewhat loosely defined type (a
directory with some things in it) and that's "it" ;) In this picture I
thought it would make sense to make the output a variant type: Either
a directory with some things it XOR a build failure. I suppose the
entry in the DB achieves this albeit a little obscured.

Thanks for the heads up.

>> Don't know why this isn't enabled by default.
> 
> Because we’re not confident enough about build determinism?  :-)

;)

Regards,
Flo

- -- 
https://fps.io
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWVcONAAoJEA5f4Coltk8Zh90H/R4NCNWQjSvjKdgdp3ZL7pzd
ARalvopgHLxISAX4zE6Fd+Xq6hu1lD4K8G9UW9htiaxetgA58Jt7I1ESmCbMnZf5
ZgDWuRe2xXjXx+nXrTJWDA37nLQmOH7k81FiA+RCwSJ/fGQVO4md6731QCR0O6zP
S1GMbADeh3kBGrJbn6+eidv0XrEzPRg/u2gBkKuOqBddbM4eeqKGKqrP4xzDD9rn
XMJ6RA3P3YgIUH60wNdDPjkc15lEDtgzV6V2DfFUVdoHB5vydQ1UN9JH2TP4mSPN
sITCeIJJ5CpIBmO55YrRhuuL4fSKuozgiwmASexK4BKNX4Ku5vvOz9oWJM6I+cY=
=5JId
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



reply via email to

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