Subject: Re: bug#35542: Installer does not display full backtrace on error

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 23:02:01 +0200

Hi Mathieu,

Mathieu Othacehe <[email-masked]> skribis:

>> That would ensure we’re only changing Guile’s notion of the terminal
>> width and not interfering with other tools we might launch as child
>> processes.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Seems like a better idea indeed. Here's an update patch.
>
> About using 200 or a much larger value as Danny suggested, I don't have
> a strong opinion myself. WDYT?

I think 200 is good.  You wouldn’t want the backtrace to be filled with
bytevectors, for instance.

Also, if people take pictures of their screen with a backtrace, I hope
there’ll still be enough stack frames on the picture.  :-)  With a large
‘terminal-width’, there’s a risk that a single frame would fill 10
lines.

> From d5f792414d0666d554dc8c7b6fee351bbe7a1c14 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Mathieu Othacehe <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 14:05:36 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] installer: Increase backtrace verbosity.
>
> * gnu/installer.scm (installer-program): Set terminal-width to 200 to
> make guile backtraces more verbose.

LGTM!

Thank you,
Ludo’.