Re: example of poor debugging message (follow up Guix Days)

[45mg]

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Speaking in very rough terms, the package definition is used to compile
> a builder script.  The daemon runs that independent builder script,
> which has no reference and no knowledge of the module that provides the
> package definition.

Hmm, right.

For this specific example, it would probably be enough for the daemon to
print the name of the derivation that failed. IIRC, it usually does - if
I run `guix build buggy-package`, I usually get a line like 'build of
<hash>-buggy-package.drv failed' in the output. If it didn't do that
here then that's notable and it's worth investigating why. Or maybe the
backtrace Sharlatan gave us was part of a larger error?