On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:51:18PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 07:33:30AM +0100, Tomáš Čech wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 04:34:34PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:12:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> > > Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
>> > >
>> > > > In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after guix
>> > > > pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant number of
>> > > > users who were still using the guix-daemon from 0.10.0.
>> > > >
>> > > > It seems unlikely that they have been updating all of root's
>> > > > packages except for the guix package. Rather, I bet they never updated
>> > > > root's packages at all, for ~1 year.
>> >
>> > They could have been stuck with an old daemon if they copied the systemd
>> > or upstart service files we provide.
>> >
>> > That problem should be fixed by 613d0895b92c677e0639d5e77c55043e38e020c8
>> > (build: Don't embed absolute paths in .service and .conf service
>> > files.).
>>
>> That is right. But
>>
>> 1) there was no release with this "fix"
>> 2) I (as distro package maintainer) didn't take this patch manually as
>>   it is fragile and hacky. Have you considered fresh guix installation?
>
>This will take effect for the next release of Guix; it addresses a
>problem that arises when somebody installs the binary release of Guix.
>
>I'm not addressing downstream packages of Guix with this commit.

I'm sorry, I may not understand correctly your answer.

Are you saying that situation when user freshly installs Guix on
system with systemd (and thus has empty /gnu/store)?

S_W