terminal-window-size breaks with ssh

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
2 participants
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • raingloom
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
raingloom
Severity
important
R
R
raingloom wrote on 27 Jan 2021 23:09
(name . Guix Bugs)(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
20210127230934.1be87ddb@riseup.net
Try running `ssh example.com guix pull` or something else that uses
progress bars. You'll get an "Inappropriate ioctl for device" instead
of Guix simply doing the sensible thing: disabling progress bars.
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 4 Feb 2021 13:49
control message for bug #46168
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87y2g46lr0.fsf@gnu.org
severity 46168 important
quit
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 4 Feb 2021 13:55
Re: bug#46168: terminal-window-size breaks with ssh
(name . raingloom)(address . raingloom@riseup.net)(address . 46168@debbugs.gnu.org)
87sg6c6lhz.fsf@gnu.org
Hi,

raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> skribis:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> Try running `ssh example.com guix pull` or something else that uses
> progress bars. You'll get an "Inappropriate ioctl for device" instead
> of Guix simply doing the sensible thing: disabling progress bars.

I can’t reproduce this with c852d897551f514de95c224fa79e748f48808068.
Specifically, ‘ssh HOST guix pull’ shows me the Git progress bar (while
updating channels), and then there are no progress bars for downloads
but dots instead (as expected).

Which revision (as returned by ‘guix describe’) behaves like this for
you?

Thanks,
Ludo’.
R
R
raingloom wrote on 6 Feb 2021 01:48
(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)(address . 46168@debbugs.gnu.org)
20210206014844.0f21d518@riseup.net
On Thu, 04 Feb 2021 13:55:04 +0100
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

Toggle quote (20 lines)
> Hi,
>
> raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> skribis:
>
> > Try running `ssh example.com guix pull` or something else that uses
> > progress bars. You'll get an "Inappropriate ioctl for device"
> > instead of Guix simply doing the sensible thing: disabling progress
> > bars.
>
> I can’t reproduce this with c852d897551f514de95c224fa79e748f48808068.
> Specifically, ‘ssh HOST guix pull’ shows me the Git progress bar
> (while updating channels), and then there are no progress bars for
> downloads but dots instead (as expected).
>
> Which revision (as returned by ‘guix describe’) behaves like this for
> you?
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.

Of course it does work now. :D
Looking at `guix pull --list-generations`, the last two before the bug
are:
Generation 6 Dec 13 2020 01:47:37
guix 1adeb74
Generation 7 Jan 23 2021 16:47:02
guix 0288e21


...aaaand I can't see later ones because guix just got killed. Maybe
the code that computes the differences between generations is not
terribly memory efficient...
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 9 Feb 2021 09:32
(name . raingloom)(address . raingloom@riseup.net)(address . 46168@debbugs.gnu.org)
87v9b1vdyz.fsf@gnu.org
Hi,

raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> skribis:

Toggle quote (17 lines)
> On Thu, 04 Feb 2021 13:55:04 +0100
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> skribis:
>>
>> > Try running `ssh example.com guix pull` or something else that uses
>> > progress bars. You'll get an "Inappropriate ioctl for device"
>> > instead of Guix simply doing the sensible thing: disabling progress
>> > bars.
>>
>> I can’t reproduce this with c852d897551f514de95c224fa79e748f48808068.
>> Specifically, ‘ssh HOST guix pull’ shows me the Git progress bar
>> (while updating channels), and then there are no progress bars for
>> downloads but dots instead (as expected).

[...]

Toggle quote (8 lines)
> Of course it does work now. :D
> Looking at `guix pull --list-generations`, the last two before the bug
> are:
> Generation 6 Dec 13 2020 01:47:37
> guix 1adeb74
> Generation 7 Jan 23 2021 16:47:02
> guix 0288e21

The problem you observed might have been fixed by
d613c1771a1986d3c0f1e034155fde41f32f9b8e (Dec. 17, 2020).

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> ...aaaand I can't see later ones because guix just got killed. Maybe
> the code that computes the differences between generations is not
> terribly memory efficient...

I’m not aware of that. Could you please report a new bug if you have
more info?

Thanks,
Ludo’.
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 9 Feb 2021 09:32
control message for bug #46168
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87tuqlvdyg.fsf@gnu.org
tags 46168 fixed
close 46168
quit
R
R
raingloom wrote on 24 Aug 2021 17:28
(no subject)
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
20210824172800.027312da@riseup.net
unarchive 46168
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 46168@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 46168
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch