Efraim Flashner skribis:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>>
>> > it happened a couple of times already that a “substitute*” expression
>> > silently failed and I only found out
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>
> > it happened a couple of times already that a “substitute*” expression
> > silently failed and I only found out about it when investigating the
> > remains of a failing
Hi,
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> it happened a couple of times already that a “substitute*” expression
> silently failed and I only found out about it when investigating the
> remains of a failing build (“guix build -K”). This can easily happen
> when a package is updated and
Ricardo Wurmus (2016-10-15 00:05 +0200) wrote:
> Hi Guix,
>
> it happened a couple of times already that a “substitute*” expression
> silently failed and I only found out about it when investigating the
> remains of a failing build (“guix build -K”). This can easily happen
> when a package is
Hi,
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 00:05:56 +0200
Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Would it be desirable to change “substitute*” (or replace it) such that
> it throws an error or returns a value if substitution failed? This
> might be helpful for the more complex packages with many
Am 15.10.2016 um 00:05 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> Would it be desirable to change “substitute*” (or replace it) such that
> it throws an error or returns a value if substitution failed? This
+1 for returning a value
--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel |
Hi Guix,
it happened a couple of times already that a “substitute*” expression
silently failed and I only found out about it when investigating the
remains of a failing build (“guix build -K”). This can easily happen
when a package is updated and substitutions “anchors” no longer exist in
the