failure between builds: json error #918
Labels
No labels
Affects/CppNix
Affects/Nightly
Affects/Only nightly
Affects/Stable
Area/build-packaging
Area/cli
Area/evaluator
Area/fetching
Area/flakes
Area/language
Area/lix ci
Area/nix-eval-jobs
Area/profiles
Area/protocol
Area/releng
Area/remote-builds
Area/repl
Area/repl/debugger
Area/store
bug
Context
contributors
Context
drive-by
Context
maintainers
Context
RFD
crash 💥
Cross Compilation
devx
docs
Downstream Dependents
E/easy
E/hard
E/help wanted
E/reproducible
E/requires rearchitecture
imported
Language/Bash
Language/C++
Language/NixLang
Language/Python
Language/Rust
Needs Langver
OS/Linux
OS/macOS
performance
regression
release-blocker
stability
Status
blocked
Status
invalid
Status
postponed
Status
wontfix
testing
testing/flakey
Topic/Large Scale Installations
ux
No milestone
No project
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: lix-project/lix#918
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Describe the bug
between building steam dependencies, after building
mono
dependency i get the following json error.Steps To Reproduce
im not sure
Expected behavior
nix --version
outputAdditional context
Smells like a bad build log line parse possibly, but I thought we fixed those. I'm not sure where else we're parsing JSON. There's definitely some improvements to error reporting that this would suggest (as in, ouch this is hard to debug).
This is a foreign exception being thrown, only protected API throws foreign exceptions IIRC? So someone must be calling an unprotected API somehow which still… throw these exceptions?
this is likely the toplevel wrapper in the daemon wrapping a json exception for transport to the client, which is also why there's absolutely no async trace info even though this should be coming out of the worker loop