From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#31974: If a phase returns #f, a warning is issued, but the build continues Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 22:14:57 +0200 Message-ID: <87bmbwx9z2.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87efgu8clc.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60370) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYGrC-0005OG-RE for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:16:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYGrB-00004w-T2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:16:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58231) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYGrB-0008W9-PY for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:16:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYGrB-0008Pf-K4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:16:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87efgu8clc.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Mon, 25 Jun 2018 23:13:03 -0400") 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: Mark H Weaver Cc: 31974@debbugs.gnu.org Mark H Weaver skribis: > I just noticed that I made a mistake in commit > d8a3b1b9e847d4a44d2695f95af77170d4d2788f, which changed 'gnu-build' in > (guix build gnu-build-system) to issue a warning if a phase returns a > value other than #t. > > The result is that if a phase returns a value other than #t, a warning > is issued, but the build nonetheless continues to the next phase, and > the build could ultimately "succeed" even some phases returned #f. > > In other words, the return values of phases are effectively ignored, > except for the warning, so the only way to cause a build with phases to > fail is to raise an exception. Thanks for the heads-up. In practice, I suppose many builds would eventually fail anyway, but we=E2=80=99ll have to keep an eye on it. Ludo=E2=80=99.