From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id cgXFB671/V+MDAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:17:02 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id AEUhA671/V8nTwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:17:02 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 266E0940483 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:17:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:45436 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kzPA4-0002US-13 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:17:00 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kzP9l-0002SL-1B for help-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:16:41 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x335.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::335]:36579) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kzP9i-00044H-OY for help-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:16:40 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x335.google.com with SMTP id y23so3181482wmi.1 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:16:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=beadling-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :date:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mS14CdpZqOvdK0prPyvlP32knV1nubq4K7YyyC+rcsM=; b=dlKSj04HgYDsCrlQ0dMzvdkO87JnZUDQmApYBx9TBAca9TVPacU5vv8HHPg0MiX/04 WBntJ606sDeLxPEj4ngNd2czWJgEOO1XRyWrYfz4/sqvWo/bGthJRHB3GHQun7pk3U9a NnYCnKhDzfo8v31MyL7kR1sa3BwCbhtTAQ8JmlFRVfPCBdustats03ZmBphk+0dctW2j raHNy8gPk8KCdtGEl2xUy//n2wYmHqzTMbMhffbvU73gorgaWk2puC7qlHHTjDvIMN0f /lPP9qX4y9YpEg8NU761wHtPrtDfhzBD1Nkp6XsqzFinGx9Dhz+OXyZWHJIFjWgXhsD5 hxwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:date:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mS14CdpZqOvdK0prPyvlP32knV1nubq4K7YyyC+rcsM=; b=OuyFjClk9Od63WDNSdn+/cuvvbfOQSyXzby2an6onM+6FEy+Swuqkbwsb60I7oYVAa De++cgK83ZCPaUB1k3sWMbVmoGC2tIv9fcaYGPzNOcU17XdLTp+Ueno3dOs8LzMdiMyf apSwItRfe2SUmQlylmUjYlFMgL6XocEsrEeNEcdUkPSsox6tLCA8/wOkK4aRlp/hTlM6 Q+NeOqLDZlADPBuL68VUUoD3evASxbEUlanpT2A6DOqh3g54NPbLKaYpiWmdO8eGslwm i+HatpDOCfvqf4gnFXzdh5WG1nM6DYvDe15VHljGGp7NaeslSscz3O5xL9Uj6Z3XH1EF Xy1w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ypv0P4sBPbKsiqYWlsdy1WqAf+5l/uyL1QlQl27l/+WmQFgOg wXneZ8DZR888quX9XmHtWms6e/N5WBk6crR5iTk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1b7zla2/8YQdH/PsAQZi0re3nEtwTZIIdhF5tFFYIS2vkKXEnHXhKnOAb6VjmtTDlb7WChQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:313:: with SMTP id q19mr700000wmd.126.1610478995635; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:16:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from phil-XPS-13-9360 (host-78-147-225-8.as13285.net. [78.147.225.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i11sm4939634wmd.47.2021.01.12.11.16.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Jan 2021 11:16:34 -0800 (PST) References: <857dp1yg0f.fsf@beadling.co.uk> <86o8ibs95q.fsf@gmail.com> <85mtxor4pq.fsf@beadling.co.uk> <85h7nqqlnv.fsf@beadling.co.uk> <86a6tftm1d.fsf@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3 From: Phil To: zimoun Subject: Re: Channel details of profile generation Message-ID: <857doiezk2.fsf@beadling.co.uk> In-reply-to: <86a6tftm1d.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 19:16:33 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: none client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::335; envelope-from=phil@beadling.co.uk; helo=mail-wm1-x335.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-guix@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: help-guix Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.56 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=beadling-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=dlKSj04H; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of help-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=help-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 266E0940483 X-Spam-Score: -2.56 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: uAkyu5/ZD7zs Hi, Thanks - I think the original question is answered now - however I am curious over why only I can reproduce issues with the incorrect use of 'guix pull'. It's tempting to say it's just undefined behaviour and move on with my life, but I've done a bit more digging.... * This appears to have nothing to do with defined channels - I have now removed the channel.scm completely and can still reproduce the problem. * The problem occurs whenever 'guix pull -l' is called incorrectly on a standard profile which has > 1 generation in it. * There are 2 outcomes I've observed so far - a) a backtrace is given, or b) the command halts for at least 27 minutes in what appears to be a frozen state (but could just be very slow). When I sent my first e-mail about this issue I showed the backtrace as per a) above. I have now tried the experiment on a completely different server and I can reproduce a), that is, I can create a profile containing 1 package in 1st generation, and use 'guix pull -l' OK. Then if I install another package for the 2nd generation I get the backtrace occurring (see below). However - I cannot reproduce b) myself on another machine, that is, I cannot reproduce the freezing of 'guix pull -l' apart from on one specific server. Instead I get the backtrace. Perhaps the problem is specific to running Guix on Ubuntu 18.04 as all my servers run this? ubuntu@foobar:~$ guix pull -p /tmp/test-profile-only-guix-3 -l \Generation 1 Jan 12 2021 18:51:57\ python 3.8.2 \Generation 2 Jan 12 2021 18:52:19\ (current) python 3.8.2 python-numpy 1.17.3 Backtrace: 11 (primitive-load "/home/ubuntu/.config/guix/curre=E2=80=A6") In guix/ui.scm: 2154:12 10 (run-guix-command _ . _) In ice-9/boot-9.scm: 1736:10 9 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _) 1731:15 8 (with-exception-handler # =E2=80=A6) 1731:15 7 (with-exception-handler # =E2=80=A6) 1731:15 6 (with-exception-handler # =E2=80=A6) In guix/scripts/pull.scm: 636:4 5 (_) In guix/memoization.scm: 100:0 4 (_ # "/tmp/test-profile-=E2=80= =A6" =E2=80=A6) In guix/scripts/pull.scm: 538:21 3 (_) In guix/inferior.scm: 256:2 2 (inferior-available-packages #f) 251:13 1 (send-inferior-request (defined? (quote #)) #f) In ice-9/boot-9.scm: 1669:16 0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _) ice-9/boot-9.scm:1669:16: In procedure raise-exception: In procedure struct-vtable: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting st= ruct): #f A few more comments inline. zimoun writes: > yet. Maybe an option =E2=80=99--export-manifest=E2=80=99 is coming=E2=80= =A6 ;-) > > http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix-hpc/2021-01-11.log Cool - thanks for pointer. > Do you mean issues when replicating my example with only the channels > guix and guix-science? I've actually reduced this down to no channel.scm file (so only default guix channel), and picking 2 packages in guix - eg python and python-numpy. > > By hanging, do you mean =E2=80=9Cyou were not enough patient=E2=80=9C? or= =E2=80=9Cafter several > minutes=E2=80=9D (10-20min), it was not finished yet? I've waited up to 27 mins with no change. > Thank for the details. Well, does it fail or is it slow? When run with only 1 generation the command returns immediately, so if it is slow, then there's a marked degrading of performance from generation 1 -> 2. My guess is it's hanging not slow - but it is a guess. > > >> I'm running out of steam a bit here but both this error in ui.scm@2154 >> and the original backtrace I posted ui.scm@2127 come from the >> run-guix-command function on attempting a primitive-load of, I assume, >> the current guix script. > > The bracktrace is a fail. But I am not able to reproduce. > For your experiment, I do not know if it is failure or slowness. To be clear the backtrace only failed once I killed the process (after waiting several minutes as discussed above). My hope was by killing it the strace might show something illuminating.