GNU bug report logs -
#61841
‘guix shell’ computes different package derivation than ‘guix build’
Previous Next
Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:38:01 UTC
Severity: important
Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #10 received at 61841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Maxim,
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> skribis:
> I’m really not sure what the impact of
> 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 is, nor whether it was the only
> solution to the problem.
>
> One thing that probably happens is that (default-guile) is now never
> used for <computed-file>, contrary to what was happening before. The
> spirit is that (default-guile) would be used as the default for all the
> declarative file-like objects; gexp compilers refer to (default-guile),
> not (%guile-for-build).
>
> Importantly, (%guile-for-build) is a derivation, possibly built for
> another system, whereas (default-guile) is a package, which allows
> ‘lower-object’ to return the derivation for the right system type.
Commit 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 turned out to have
unintended side effects:
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/61841
I fixed it with:
a516a0ba93 gexp: computed-file: Do not honor %guile-for-build.
fee1d08f0d pack: Make sure tests can run without a world rebuild.
Please take a look.
We should think about how to improve our processes to avoid such issues
in the future. I did raise concerns about this very patch late at night
during FOSDEM, 24h after submission, and reaffirmed my viewpoint days
later. I understand that delaying a nice patch series like this one is
unpleasant, but I think those concerns should have been taken into
account.
Ludo’.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 120 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.