GNU bug report logs - #24083
guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 24083 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 24083 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 00:25:02 +0200

guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.

$ guix lint perl-io-socket-inet6 ; echo $?
;;; note: source file /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/networking.scm
;;;       newer than compiled /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/networking.go
;;; note: source file /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/mail.scm
;;;       newer than compiled /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/mail.go
;;; note: source file /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/ldc.scm
;;;       newer than compiled /x/home/dannym/src/guix/gnu/packages/ldc.go
gnu/packages/networking.scm:437:1: perl-io-socket-inet6-2.72: line 464 is way too long (96 characters)
gnu/packages/networking.scm:437:1: perl-io-socket-inet6-2.72: line 483 is way too long (92 characters)
0
^--- ooops

Message #8 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 22:57:15 +0200

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:

> guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.

It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
(These are warnings, not errors.)

Ludo’.

Message #11 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 23:12:22 +0200

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 22:57:15 +0200
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
> 
> > guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.  
> 
> It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
> (These are warnings, not errors.)

Too bad :)

I wrote a little helper script which was supposed to prevent me from posting packages that don't build or lint. Then I found out that the lint actually doesn't fail on warnings. So now my script is only half as useful (the builder does fail on build error).

It would be nice to have a way to also check the lint status.

Message #14 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 23:19:04 +0100

Hi,

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 23:12, Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 22:57:15 +0200 ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>> Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
>> 
>> > guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.  
>> 
>> It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
>> (These are warnings, not errors.)
>
> Too bad :)
>
> I wrote a little helper script which was supposed to prevent me from posting
> packages that don't build or lint. Then I found out that the lint actually
> doesn't fail on warnings. So now my script is only half as useful (the builder
> does fail on build error).
>
> It would be nice to have a way to also check the lint status.

The good news is that the initial example ’perl-io-socket-inet6’ now
does not report any linting error. :-)

Well, on the other side, it is still the same behaviour.

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix lint julia ; echo $?
gnu/packages/julia.scm:301:0: julia <at> 1.5.3: line 301 is way too long (107 characters)
gnu/packages/julia.scm:303:0: julia <at> 1.5.3: line 303 is way too long (106 characters)
gnu/packages/julia.scm:226:13: julia <at> 1.5.3: can be upgraded to 1.6.0
gnu/packages/julia.scm:227:12: julia <at> 1.5.3: source not archived on Software Heritage
0
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

What do we do.  On one hand, «it never pretended to exit with non-zero
when warninf» and on the other hand it could be annoying.

Well, since it is 4 years and 34 weeks, I consider it is not a big deal
and so we can close.  WDYT?


All the best,
simon

Message #17 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>, 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 23:41:05 +0200

Hi,

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 22:57, ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
> Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
>
>> guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.
>
> It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
> (These are warnings, not errors.)

Do we modify the returned code?  If not, can we close?

Cheers,
simon

Message #22 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>, 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:05:49 +0200

Hi,

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 22:57, ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
> Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
>
>> guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.
>
> It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
> (These are warnings, not errors.)

Because of that, I propose to close without modifying the returned code.
WDYT?

Cheers,
simon

Message #25 received at 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 24083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:20:21 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:05:49 +0200
zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 22:57, ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
> > Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
> >  
> >> guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.  
> >
> > It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
> > (These are warnings, not errors.)  

Sure, it makes sense.  I'm just doing " |wc -l" now.

> Because of that, I propose to close without modifying the returned code.
> WDYT?

Agreed.

But I would suggest to document in the manual that the exit status is
not set,  though.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #30 received at 24083-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 24083-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#24083: guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 12:57:12 -0400

Hi,

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> writes:

> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:05:49 +0200
> zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 22:57, ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>> > Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:
>> >  
>> >> guix lint doesn't actually fail on some errors.  
>> >
>> > It never pretended to exit with non-zero when warnings are emitted.  :-)
>> > (These are warnings, not errors.)  
>
> Sure, it makes sense.  I'm just doing " |wc -l" now.
>
>> Because of that, I propose to close without modifying the returned code.
>> WDYT?
>
> Agreed.
>
> But I would suggest to document in the manual that the exit status is
> not set,  though.

Acting on the proposed and agreed closing action :-).

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.