GNU bug report logs - #57559
guix pull fails on http status code 503

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: André A. Gomes <andremegafone <at> gmail.com>

Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 11:22:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, André A. Gomes <andremegafone <at> gmail.com>, 57559 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#57559: guix pull fails on http status code 503
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 22:20:10 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 05-09-2022 10:21, zimoun wrote:
> On sam., 03 sept. 2022 at 19:27, Maxime Devos<maximedevos <at> telenet.be>  wrote:
>
>>    * if some but not all channels are available, and there is at least
>>      one updated channel --> log the missing channels, and update the
>>      channels that_are_  available (but don't 'ignore' the missing
>>      channels by removing them!).
> What do you mean by «but don't 'ignore' the missing channels by removing
> them!»?  Do you mean keep the last revision locally known for this
> channel?

I'm not sure what you're asking, because of the negatives.

With "but don't ignore [...] by [...]", I meant that, yes.

If you meant "don't ignore [...] by [...]", then no, with 'ignoring by 
removing', I meant, literally removing them.  More concretely, a 
situation like this:

 * In the channels.scm, two channels are declared: guix and guix-foo.
 * User does "guix pull"; Guix downloads the source code of guix and
   guix-foo.
 * Downloading guix failed (503).  As such, Guix decided to ignore the
   guix channel, by removing it from the list of channels to build.
   (The in-memory list I mean, I don't mean modifying the channels.smc
   file)
 * Guix tries building the guix-foo channel and installing it, without
   the guix channel.
 * This cannot work (the guix-foo channel uses modules from guix for
   basic stuff like G-exps, packages, coreutils, ..., and it was the
   removed guix channel that had things build-aux/build-self.scm which
   is required for pulling).

(It's not unlike double negatives! I first thought of the latter 
interpretation but on second thought you might have meant the former.)

Greetings,
Maxime.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]
[OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc (application/pgp-keys, attachment)]
[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

This bug report was last modified 353 days ago.

Previous Next


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