From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Subject: bug#24670: Unexpected EOF reading a line (from guix pull) [forward]
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 14:21:10 +0000
Message-ID: <871szjxb8p.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
References: <20161011223407.GA31313@khaalida>
	<8760oycwno.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <20161012070258.GA12645@khaalida>
	<87y41s8ybd.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<idjbmyoxzgx.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
	<87k2dbvlhd.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<idj37jzxmxf.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
	<87twcfp44d.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<idjzim7w3i3.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
	<87r37jp1dj.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<idjwphbvzmd.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38997)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bv3P6-00016R-2Z
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:24:12 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bv3P0-000423-Mt
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:24:06 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:49196)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bv3P0-00041v-JG
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:24:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bv3P0-0002Yn-B8
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:24:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.24670.B24670.14764550289822@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <idjwphbvzmd.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>
Cc: 24670@debbugs.gnu.org, dian_cecht@zoho.com

Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de> writes:

> ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> writes:
>
>> It is impossible to reproduce exactly the system which caused the bug,
>> but I will try to reproduce it as good as you can with Gentoo.
>
> I chuckled a little.  It’s ironic because with Guix we actually can
> reproduce systems with relative ease :)

Yeah… you know one of the reasons why I prefer Guix work over my Gentoo
works. Yet I still maintain for Gentoo... and possibly will become
Gentoo developer next year so that GNUnet packages can be in portage.

> Which is why I suggest trying the official installation method.  If the
> user can reproduce this with the official release we could actually
> investigate this better.  If this is specific to a third-party package
> of Guix it doesn’t really belong here, in my opinion.
>
> ~~ Ricardo
>

I'd still like to get the information I asked for, that's enough for me
to work on checking for a potential bug.
Beyond that I agree that the official installation method should be
tried when the third party installation offered by my ebuild fails.