From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jack Hill Subject: bug#34890: guix system: error: failed to install bootloader Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 01:01:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <87tvg26rp8.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56016) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h5O4f-0004Qr-PL for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 01:11:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h5Nwt-0001W2-1x for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 01:03:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33316) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h5Nws-0001Vn-Gz for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 01:03:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h5Nws-0006Uh-95 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Mar 2019 01:03:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87tvg26rp8.fsf@posteo.net> 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: Brett Gilio Cc: 34890@debbugs.gnu.org On Sat, 16 Mar 2019, Brett Gilio wrote: > I can replicate this bug, however it is still successfully installing a > new system configuration. The error printout seems erroneous (pun > intended). Indeed, I also do get a new system configuration reflecting my changes. However, I'm not sure if the output is just erroneous of if grub is really failing to be installed. By that I mean that the grub-install call is failing, resulting in this output. Since grub has been previously installed to my disk, most of the time I don't need to install the bootloader binary again, so this failure doesn't cause problems. > I am sure there is a regression somewhere, but it does not seem to > adversely effect the method in question. I wonder if Ludovic's recent work [0][1] on handeling the bootloader messages could be the cause. [0] 22f95e028f038cee342f455dfc55bd32b804907c [1] f0cc5e7e1e4c03af29c5d4855dc5962502c49147