From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 05:23:07 2022 Received: (at 56289) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 09:23:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57392 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o6Tud-0003ne-DE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:23:07 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:17295) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o6TuX-0003mw-Hw for 56289@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:23:05 -0400 Received: from lprikler-laptop.ist.intra (gw.ist.tugraz.at [129.27.202.101]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LXwwy2J0Yz1LZWB; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 11:22:58 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4LXwwy2J0Yz1LZWB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1656494578; bh=1aZCKJdWmoJiHzWHrTCQUg8NI8O+EcHgT53B/qtNLZo=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=hG1d1lx9gNPLMkXuY3e3xNO2ODjv8DYD9MW9q3Rl2nGS6Vs+2OwT09TEf8BGLB2XI g7FvleuJeu56c04GtpSXF/4lwq3Gf9b6J+zcOQ7lFM5kF8OTxxtem+JOmQ6Ri14REI 4qbmbPVenNpY4srgg5j/DXBXPZJqhOKcfUVgoSpw= Message-ID: <823572af8921c9b7b1468ace6d248eb5f4bbee68.camel@ist.tugraz.at> Subject: Re: "guix shell -f guix2.scm" fails always From: Liliana Marie Prikler To: Maxime Devos , 56289@debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 11:22:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <2df655ef071dd057655ebf6a87335148c6cd64e7.camel@ist.tugraz.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: waObeELIUl4ypBWmcn/8wQ X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.116 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56289 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Am Mittwoch, dem 29.06.2022 um 11:10 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos: > Liliana Marie Prikler schreef op wo 29-06-2022 om 08:19 [+0200]: > > > Looks like "-f" is ignored entirely? > > Have you tried specifying a file that actually contains a package > > (not a manifest)? > > None of the examples contain a manifest, oops-guix.scm actually > contains a list of packages as mentioned previously (*). My bad, I read that as specifications->manifest. Note that for specifications->package, you could simply specify hello on the command line. Having tested your file now, I can say that guix shell builds hello as expected, whereas with specifications->manifest, it produces a lovely backtrace (which is more or less what one ought to expect). > And the exact same thing happens if a package is used instead of a > list of packages. One thing to check here is whether a cache might be interfering. I think it is an already known bug, that the file itself is not key in the cache, which you can work around by specifying --rebuild-cache. Cheers