GNU bug report logs - #30647
[PATCH] guix build: Support '--remote-log-file=PACKAGE'.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #20 received at 30647 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Oleg Pykhalov <go.wigust <at> gmail.com>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 30647 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#30647] [PATCH] guix build: Support
 '--remote-log-file=PACKAGE'.
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 18:40:50 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

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

>>>> ‘--remote-log-file’ allows to get a URL for a build log file on a substitute
>>>> server regardless is it built locally.  ‘--log-file’ returns always local
>>>> build log file.
>>>
>>> What did you think of having ‘--log-file’ transparently fall back to
>>> searching for log files on substitute servers?
>
> To put it differently: what do you dislike about the current behavior?

Suppose package build failed locally.  I want to receive a log from a
remote server.  I could do it manually by:

1.  Removing local failed log.
2.  ‘wget’, but I need to know a URL.
3.  Hydra web interface, which is slow (especially multiple packages).

> No no: keep the current behavior, but print something when we’re looking
> for a remote log file (currently it silently checks whether the remote
> log file is available.)

Still not clear to me.  If ‘guix --log-file’ checks for a remote log
file, then it gets a valid URL to a remote build log file for free,
doesn't it?

>> I don't think mixing those in one output is good, because for example
>> you cannot do like:
>>
>> diff -u <(guix build --log-file hello) <(guix build --remote-log-file hello)
>
> I see.  I guess I’ve never wanted that, or rather, when I do, I
> explicitly wget the remote log file.  :-)

Could I ask What's your workflow for ‘wget’?

> So I guess I’m unconvinced about the need for a separate
> ‘--remote-log-file’ option.
>
> What do people think?  Ricardo?

Maybe CC him?  Or is it a bad etiquette for a mailing list, because he
is subscribed?

>> As a better approach in addition to ‘--no-substitutes’, maybe we could
>> implement ‘--only-substitutes’ (as I remember Nix has it)?  Such flag
>> will return a remote log file and will avoid building packages locally.
>
> That could be an option, but that’s much more work (not limited to log
> file handling.)

Yes, but benefits (especially avoid building packages locally) are
worth.

If you don't agree with the patch, I'll not complain and will try to
work on ‘--only-substitutes’.  :-)

Oleg.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

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