--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
failing test-suite |
|
Date: |
Fri, 16 Feb 2018 01:02:53 +0100 |
on my raspberry pi, building from commit
7e0a6fac0b4ebffda322eff6e803363ee72a257a. the test-suite fails.
my current guix is from november or so.
the first log was created with -j 4.
the second with -j 1.
not sure, how critical the errors are. somehow i still can't read the
test-suite logs.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#30476: failing test-suite |
|
Date: |
Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:16:07 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) |
Martin Castillo <address@hidden> skribis:
> On 16.02.2018 14:00, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Martin Castillo <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> ++ guix build superseded -d
>>> accepted connection from pid 22991, user pi
>>> random seed for tests: 1518709083
>>> guix build: package 'superseded' has been superseded by 'bar'
>>> ++ guix build bar -d
>>> accepted connection from pid 23282, user pi
>>> random seed for tests: 1518709358
>>> + test
>>> /home/pi/code/guix/test-tmp/store/y6l76g4i1m2q0ckliw4941x4sa0wa24w-bar-9001.drv
>>> = ''
>>> + rm -rf t-guix-build-10577
>>> FAIL tests/guix-build.sh (exit status: 1)
>>
>> This one looks fishy, I don’t see how it could happen (see
>> tests/guix-build.sh). Is it reproducible?
>>
>> You can run “make check TESTS=tests/guix-build.sh” to run just this
>> test.
>>
>
> No, it is not reproducible.
OK, I’ll close the bug but do reopen it if it shows up again.
>>> In guix/scripts/package.scm:
>>> 250:34 5 (_ #<package address@hidden gnu/packages/flashing-tools.s�> �)
>>> In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
>>> 466:18 4 (fold #<procedure 1c4a100 at guix/ui.scm:1158:8 (metri�> �)
>>> In guix/ui.scm:
>>> 1161:13 3 (_ _ 0)
>>> 1040:23 2 (texi->plain-text _)
>>> In texinfo.scm:
>>> 1131:22 1 (parse _)
>>> 966:36 0 (loop #<input: string 1c20038> (*fragment*) #<procedur�> �)
>>>
>>> texinfo.scm:966:36: In procedure loop:
>>> texinfo.scm:966:36: Throw to key `parser-error' with args `(#f "Unknown
>>> command" ifdtool)'.
>>
>> This one was fixed in commit ec0f3d0a5bdc1f56308aeff5dabfbb3ab18b9810.
>>
>
> May I ask, how these kind of errors slip in? Does the reviewer only look
> at the technical parts of patches?
Reviewers and contributors do their best I believe, but sometimes errors
slip through. It’s rare though.
This particular issue would have been caught by ‘guix lint’.
Ludo’.
--- End Message ---