From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" Subject: bug#27231: regression?: grub-configuration for grub-efi does not return a bootloader-configuration Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 16:25:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20170604142513.GA18416@floriannotebook> References: <20170604104701.GA4279@floriannotebook> <87shjfq3ek.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dHWSn-0003Qp-Rp for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:25:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dHWSk-0008DL-Ff for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:25:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:53242) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dHWSk-0008Cv-48 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:25:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dHWSj-0002yh-Ub for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:25:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87shjfq3ek.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Alex Kost Cc: 27231@debbugs.gnu.org On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 04:38:11PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote: > This is a limitation of 'grub-configuration' macro: that backtrace > happened because you have 'grub' field *not* in the first place of your > 'grub-configuration'. > > […] > > Note that this will work if you put (grub grub-efi) in the first place: > > (grub-configuration (grub grub-efi) > (device "/dev/sda")) > Ah… Thank you for clarifying. (bootloader (grub-configuration (grub grub-efi) (device "/dev/sda"))) I just tried and this fails too with the same error. I’m not sure why it does not match the syntax rule for grub-configuration. This macro seems complicated and unintuitive. I don’t like how a syntax rule feigns being a record definition but isn’t and therefore breaks things… Why not just inherit bootloader-configuration? Regards, Florian