Subject: bug#27152: deprecation warnings with Guile 2.2.2

From: Mark H Weaver <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 01:18:11 -0400

Maxim Cournoyer <[email-masked]> writes:

> Mark H Weaver <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <[email-masked]> writes:
>>
>>> Why not let good old sed have a run at it? Seems like a simple find
>>> and replace operation, and 'block looks nicer than _IOFBF to my
>>> eyes.
>>
>> If we did that, then Guix would stop working with guile-2.0.  Given that
>> guile-2.2 is not yet available from many popular distros, I think it
>> would be unwise to drop guile-2.0 at this time.
>
> Isn't Guile included in the Guix binary releases?

Yes, but that's not the only supported method to install Guix.  While I
acknowledge that most new users are happy to use our binary tarball,
many users prefer to compile our source tarball, or to try out a Guix
package provided by their existing distribution.

Security conscious users tend to be nervous about entrusting their
computer's security to a source of precompiled binaries that is new to
them.

While it's true that they will need our bootstrap binaries, and that
they are highly likely to end up using our binary substitutes before
long, it nonetheless seems to me that it is best not to ask newcomers to
trust a large binary from us as their first step into our community,
without providing other easy methods that are more comfortable to them.
Users are comfortable installing a package from a distro that they've
already put their trust in.

So, I would prefer to continue supporting guile-2.0 until guile-2.2 is
more widely deployed in popular distros, or at least until it becomes a
hassle to continue supporting guile-2.0.

I'll also mention that there's apparently an unresolved bug somewhere
(guile2.2-ssh?) that prevents us from using guix-based-on-guile-2.2 on
hydra.gnu.org:

  https://bugs.gnu.org/26976

       Mark