From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Match-error for patches Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 17:32:36 +0100 Message-ID: <87a91gcamz.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20150118132526.GA15628@debian> <87zj9gcgpe.fsf@gnu.org> <20150118161010.GA20517@debian> 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]:35485) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YCsmL-0002JC-Cg for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 11:32:46 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YCsmI-0006w6-5j for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 11:32:45 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:44969) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YCsmH-0006vr-Ur for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 11:32:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150118161010.GA20517@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Sun, 18 Jan 2015 17:10:10 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Andreas Enge skribis: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 03:21:33PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Could it be that the installed Guix was miscompiled? Does >> ~/.config/guix/latest exist? > > There is no ~/.config/guix. When is it created? The first time =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99 is run. > I also tried to remove the installed guix (except for the database, of > course), "make distclean" and new compilation. The problem remained. Hmm, weird (=E2=80=9Cmake clean-go && make=E2=80=9D is usually enough.) >> Indeed, there=E2=80=99s a substitute for /gnu/store/kjxy0nlkgc6b4g8yx9ss= 6s4sxyhb25ci-soprano-2.9.4 >> (x86_64-linux.) >> Are you building the same one? > > Yes. But I tried yesterday before the substitute existed. > > Now I am getting the same problem with my local kdelibs package. The backtrace indicates a match-error here: (match patch ((? string?) (add-to-store store (basename patch) #t "sha256" patch)) ((? origin?) (package-source-derivation store patch system))) Presumably that means that PATCH is #f, which can happen if =E2=80=98search-patch=E2=80=99 returned #f, due to the patch not being foun= d in the search path (patch not installed, or file name typo?). Could you check that? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.