From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#23274: Misleading error message when running guix-daemon as unprivileged user Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 17:22:18 +0100 Message-ID: <87zi6pw7yd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160412012237.GA24435@jasmine> <337b943b-56a1-f863-104e-8b309b18fb5d@uni-bremen.de> <87h8sx4nex.fsf@gnu.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]:51064) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQrB-0003kv-Lv for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:23:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQr8-000344-C4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:23:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:48412) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQr8-00033q-8r for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:23:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQr8-0003WE-2R for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:23:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: (Martin Castillo's message of "Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:25:00 +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: Martin Castillo Cc: 23274-done@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Martin, Martin Castillo skribis: >> =E2=80=9CAddress already in use=E2=80=9D makes me directly think that th= ere is already >>another daemon running. > > This was in response to OP, saying that I don't think that needs to be ch= anged. > > The rest was about testing it with root and I (half) expected an error me= ssage that explicitly says, that another daemon is already running. If this= was right, op would be right. But this is not the case and it seems like i= t is wanted the way it is. > > So yes, there is no problem in my eyes, too. This can be closed. OK, I had completely misunderstood, thanks for clarifying. Closing! Ludo=E2=80=99.