GNU bug report logs -
#30087
"guix package -A" hangs with attached package set
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 30087 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 30087 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30087
; Package
guix
.
(Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:52:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
.
(Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:52:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Leo,
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 07:26:31 -0800
Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> wrote:
> I can't reproduce this with a recent Guix. Are you using any custom
> packages or modifications?
Yeah, sorry, I checked it now. It's because of packages in my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH. When I move them away, "guix package -A" works fine.
Attached the offending directory from inside my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
Warning! If you decide to extract the attachment inside your GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH, be sure to save your work! This hangs your computer.
I think it should still not happen. Hence, I opened a new bugreport now.
[wip.tar.gz (application/gzip, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30087
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:15:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 30087 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Danny,
This old bug #30087 is about something specific to one of your use
cases.
<http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/30087>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 16:50, Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 07:26:31 -0800
> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> wrote:
>
>> I can't reproduce this with a recent Guix. Are you using any custom
>> packages or modifications?
>
> Yeah, sorry, I checked it now. It's because of packages in my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH. When I move them away, "guix package -A" works fine.
>
> Attached the offending directory from inside my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
>
> Warning! If you decide to extract the attachment inside your GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH, be sure to save your work! This hangs your computer.
>
> I think it should still not happen. Hence, I opened a new bugreport now.
Is it still relevant? If yes, could you provide more information to
tackle it? For example, more context or recipe to reproduce it. If no,
feel free to close it.
All the best,
simon
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
Request was from
zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Sat, 19 Dec 2020 09:37:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30087
; Package
guix
.
(Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:19:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #13 received at 30087 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Danny,
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 at 01:10, zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> This old bug #30087 is about something specific to one of your use
> cases.
>
> <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/30087>
>
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 16:50, Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 07:26:31 -0800
>> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> wrote:
>>
>>> I can't reproduce this with a recent Guix. Are you using any custom
>>> packages or modifications?
>>
>> Yeah, sorry, I checked it now. It's because of packages in my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH. When I move them away, "guix package -A" works fine.
>>
>> Attached the offending directory from inside my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
>>
>> Warning! If you decide to extract the attachment inside your GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH, be sure to save your work! This hangs your computer.
>>
>> I think it should still not happen. Hence, I opened a new bugreport now.
>
> Is it still relevant? If yes, could you provide more information to
> tackle it? For example, more context or recipe to reproduce it. If no,
> feel free to close it.
If no news in the coming days about the relevance of this bug, I will
took the liberty to close it.
Cheers,
simon
Reply sent
to
zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:35:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:35:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #18 received at 30087-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 17:12, zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is it still relevant? If yes, could you provide more information to
>> tackle it? For example, more context or recipe to reproduce it. If no,
>> feel free to close it.
>
> If no news in the coming days about the relevance of this bug, I will
> took the liberty to close it.
So I am closing. Feel free to reopen it if I have misunderstood
something.
All the best,
simon
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Tue, 09 Feb 2021 12:24:12 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 48 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.