Subject: Re: bug#41908: guix time-machine fails; XXXX is not related to introductory commit of channel 'guix'

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 10:53:46 +0200

zimoun <[email-masked]> skribis:

> Just to be sure to understand:
>
>  1- * 41a2d6a8b9 (newer)
>  2- * e70e097882 (between)
>  3- * 36640207c9 (older)
>  4- * xxxxxxxxxx (first authenticated commit)
>
> From a fresh cache,
>
>  a) if #2 is authenticated, because it is descendant of #4, it is stored
>  and all the commits between (closure), i.e., #3 should be considered as
>  authenticated.
>
>  b) then if #1 is authenticated, because it is a descendant of the last
>  authenticated i.e. #2, it is stored in the cache.
>
>  c) now let try #3.  It is considered authenticated because in the closure
>  of #4 and #2.
>
> Yes it makes sense.  All is good. :-)

Yup, looks correct.  :-)

> (And the assumption is: if Guix does not raise then it means that the
> commit is authenticated.)

Exactly.  I know it’s disappointing, but it’s one of these features
that’s pretty much invisible until you run into troubles.

Ludo’.