From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#27032: make check fails for Guix 0.13.0 Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 13:44:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87shju32eu.fsf@gnu.org> References: 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]:53387) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDUiv-0001Vn-6i for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 07:45:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDUir-0000Ij-Vn for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 07:45:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:32912) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDUir-0000IZ-SX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 07:45:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dDUir-0006L8-MN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 07:45:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: (William's message of "Mon, 22 May 2017 23:51:56 +0100") 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: William Cc: 27032@debbugs.gnu.org Hi William, William skribis: > I am trying to do a fresh install of GuixSD 0.13.0 (using UEFI if it's > important), after running "guix system init /mnt/etc/config.scm /mnt" > the "make check" stage of guix fails. There was one problem, which is that substitutes for the =E2=80=98guix=E2= =80=99 package itself were missing. This is now fixed, meaning that if you install GuixSD 0.13.0 now, you won=E2=80=99t have to build =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99. Could you try again? > test-name: dead path can be explicitly collected > location: /tmp/guix-build-guix-0.13.0.drv-0/source/tests/store.scm:178 > source: > + (test-assert > + "dead path can be explicitly collected" > + (let ((p (add-text-to-store > + %store > + "random-text" > + (random-text) > + '()))) > + (let-values > + (((paths freed) (delete-paths %store (list p)))) > + (and (equal? paths (list p)) > + (> freed 0) > + (not (file-exists? p)))))) > actual-value: #f > result: FAIL [...] > test-name: verify-store + check-contents > location: /tmp/guix-build-guix-0.13.0.drv-0/source/tests/store.scm:815 > source: > + (test-assert > + "verify-store + check-contents" > + (with-store > + s > + (let* ((text (random-text)) > + (drv (build-expression->derivation > + s > + "corrupt" > + `(let ((out (assoc-ref %outputs "out"))) > + (call-with-output-file > + out > + (lambda (port) (display ,text port))) > + #t) > + #:guile-for-build > + (package-derivation > + s > + %bootstrap-guile > + (%current-system)))) > + (file (derivation->output-path drv))) > + (with-derivation-substitute > + drv > + text > + (and (build-derivations s (list drv)) > + (verify-store s #:check-contents? #t) > + (begin > + (chmod file 420) > + (call-with-output-file > + file > + (lambda (port) (display "corrupt!" port))) > + #t) > + (not (verify-store s #:check-contents? #t)) > + (delete-paths s (list file))))))) > actual-value: #f > actual-error: > + (srfi-34 > + #) > result: FAIL I=E2=80=99m surprised by the =E2=80=9Cdtmp=E2=80=9D prefix here. It shoul= d be =E2=80=9C/tmp/guix-tests=E2=80=9D. Was the log altered in some way? Apart from that it=E2=80=99s hard to draw any conclusions. We run these te= sts very often without problems. The difference here is that the GuixSD installation system uses unionfs-fuse for its root file system, and I suspect that file system could have slightly different semantics that bite here. We=E2=80=99ll have to investigate this. Thanks for your report! Ludo=E2=80=99.