From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur Subject: Re: Cuirass fibers crash // using with GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 19:17:41 +0200 Message-ID: <877ekwrfey.fsf@lassieur.org> References: <87h8k3phqq.fsf@lassieur.org> <87r2j4bzy2.fsf@mdc-berlin.de> 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]:46164) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1foXWP-0003B1-0j for help-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 13:17:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1foXWK-0005ky-2R for help-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 13:17:48 -0400 Received: from mail.lassieur.org ([83.152.10.219]:60406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1foXWJ-0005k2-Nn for help-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 13:17:43 -0400 In-reply-to: <87r2j4bzy2.fsf@mdc-berlin.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: help-guix@gnu.org Hi Ricardo, Ricardo Wurmus writes: >>> Another problem is that Cuirass crashes on startup. The Cuirass log >>> shows me this: >>> >>> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >>> 2018-08-09T16:54:05 running Fibers on 4 kernel threads >>> Uncaught exception in fiber ##f: >>> In ice-9/eval.scm: >>> 619:8 1 (_ #(#(# #< ?> ?))) >>> In unknown file: >>> 0 (_ # # ?) >>> ERROR: In procedure for-each: Wrong type argument: #f >>> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >>> >>> The Cuirass process remains, but appears to be stuck. >> >> This is because your specification list is invalid. I just noticed the >> Guix manual about Cuirass is out of date. Please, have a look at the >> Cuirass manual instead. > > Can we prevent this unhelpful error message by validating the > specifications? We definitely should, I opened https://bugs.gnu.org/32422 to keep track of it. Cl=C3=A9ment