GNU bug report logs - #27271
[PATCH 0/4] Catch collisions at profile creation time

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 09:24:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #26 received at 27271 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Ricardo Wurmus
 <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 27271 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#27271: [PATCH 0/4] Catch collisions at profile creation time
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:32:44 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Heya,
>
> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> skribis:
>
>>> These patches allow us to catch problematic collisions when computing
>>> a profile derivation.  As we know, the profile builder often spits out
>>> a number of warnings about collisions but that is not very useful because
>>> users cannot distinguish the problematic cases from the harmless cases
>>> (an example of a harmless case is when GDB and Binutils provide an
>>> almost-identical .info file twice).
>>
>> This is very good!  Thanks for implementing it!
>>
>>> An open question is whether there are commonly used combinations of
>>> packages that trigger conflicts.  I haven’t had any problems with my
>>> profile (with 234 packages) nor with my GuixSD config, but I encourage
>>> you to test it on your profile!
>>
>> We often see this at the MDC because some people don’t use manifests and
>> I may have upgraded the shared Guix instance between invocations of
>> “guix package”.  This happens particularly often with numpy because
>> that’s propagated quite often.  (I’d *love* to get rid of propagated
>> inputs in Python!  They are so annoying!)
>
> Perhaps we could modify ‘sys.path’ from the top of ‘__init__.py’ file to
> get something similar to RUNPATH.  I’m not sure if there are any
> downsides or gotchas.  Thoughts?

Python actually has a native mechanism for setting up package-specific
search paths: https://docs.python.org/3/library/site.html

In short, it looks for a file "package.pth" where additional search
paths can be specified (other sys.path manipulations are allowed too).

I asked Hartmut about this during the python-build-system refactoring,
and the counter-argument was that if package A and B depends on
different versions of package C, odd failures could occur. I'm not
convinced propagation sidesteps this problem, however:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00856.html

It would be good to try it out.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 8 years and 57 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.