bug#65606: Cuirass Compute Guix Derivation Bug

bug#65606: Cuirass Compute Guix Derivation Bug

[Karl G. Hallsby via Bug reports for GNU Guix]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 80 bytes --]

This error occurred on a Cuirass system using guix 4dfdd82 on a Guile
project.


[-- Attachment #2: cuirass-compute-guix-derivation.log --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 3066 bytes --]

bug#65606: Cuirass Compute Guix Derivation Bug

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hello,

"Karl G. Hallsby" <karl@hallsby.com> writes:

> fetching path `/gnu/store/rlbyjwc1kmhwr4y3a0m31wd37l0ll024-po4a-0.69'...
> Downloading https://ci.guix.gnu.org/nar/lzip/rlbyjwc1kmhwr4y3a0m31wd37l0ll024-po4a-0.69...

> [K po4a-0.69  2.0MiB                        0B/s 00:00 ?                  ?   0.0%
> [K po4a-0.69  2.0MiB                    1.6MiB/s 00:00 ??                 ?   3.1%
> [K po4a-0.69  2.0MiB                    215KiB/s 00:01 ??                 ?   6.2%
> [K po4a-0.69  2.0MiB                     67KiB/s 00:03 ???                ?   9.3%
> [K po4a-0.69  2.0MiB                     66KiB/s 00:04 ????               ?  12.4%Backtrace:
> In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>   1752:10 19 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
> In cuirass/scripts/evaluate.scm:
>      99:7 18 (_)
>    105:27 17 (thunk)
> In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>   1752:10 16 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
> In guix/store.scm:
>    659:37 15 (thunk)
>   2168:25 14 (run-with-store #<store-connection 256.99 7fab6d89dfa0> ?)
> In cuirass/scripts/evaluate.scm:
>      85:6 13 (_ _)
> In guix/channels.scm:
>     982:2 12 (_ _)
>     924:2 11 (_ _)
> In guix/monads.scm:
>     487:9 10 (_ _)
> In guix/store.scm:
>    1996:8  9 (_ _)
> In guix/channels.scm:
>    675:14  8 (_ #<store-connection 256.99 7fab6d89dfa0>)
> In guix/store.scm:
>   2168:25  7 (run-with-store #<store-connection 256.99 7fab6d89dfa0> ?)
>    1298:8  6 (call-with-build-handler _ _)
>    1298:8  5 (call-with-build-handler #<procedure 7fab6e7dd8d8 at g?> ?)
> In guix/channels.scm:
>    690:14  4 (_)
> In guix/store.scm:
>   2168:25  3 (run-with-store #<store-connection 256.99 7fab6d89dfa0> ?)
> In ice-9/eval.scm:
>    191:27  2 (_ #(#(#<directory (build-self) 7fab6d8635a0> #<pr?>) ?))
> In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>   1685:16  1 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)
>   1685:16  0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)

> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception:
> ERROR:
>   1. &message: "You found a bug: the program '/gnu/store/cxb9kcppq32jvjq3sqld84v2fj1k8hgi-compute-guix-derivation'\nfailed to compute the derivation for Guix (version: \"74d72046bdc1ed6c859565570d0db58d20c9ddd7\"; system: \"x86_64-linux\";\nhost version: \"1.4.0-10.4dfdd82\"; pull-version: 1).\nPlease report the COMPLETE output above by email to <bug-guix@gnu.org>.\n"

The problem occurred while downloading a substitute, so it seems to be a
bug in 'guix substitute'.  Perhaps related to a network problem that was
not correctly handled.  The backtrace is not super useful... I wonder
how we could change that.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

bug#65606: Cuirass Compute Guix Derivation Bug

[Karl G. Hallsby via Bug reports for GNU Guix]

> The problem occurred while downloading a substitute, so it seems to be a
> bug in 'guix substitute'.  Perhaps related to a network problem that was
> not correctly handled.

That might be it. I have completely forgotten what this submission was
about or how I hit it. The only other pieces of information I can
provide is that Cuirass instance is running in a VM on Proxmox and that
I am using the default build mode with the local daemon. This machine is
CI for my personal projects and channels, so a single machine is enough
for building those.

I think this was a transient issue. Doing a "herd restart cuirass" fixed
it, I think.

I have not seen this issue again, though I have seen others with
Cuirass. These new issues do not belong in this thread though.

> The backtrace is not super useful... I wonder how we could change
> that.

Getting better backtraces for Cuirass-issued Guix commands would be
amazing! There are some instances, like this one, where the backtrace
does not help much.

--
Raven Hallsby