GNU bug report logs - #50960
[PATCH 00/10] Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment'

Previous Next

Full log

Message #113 received at 50960 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Cc: 50960 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50960] [PATCH 10/10] shell: Maintain a profile cache.
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 10:08:55 +0200

Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès schreef op za 02-10-2021 om 16:14 [+0200]:
>> > Why only use the 'basename' of a file name instead of the full name?
>> > (Consider the case where a user has multiple "guix.scm" or "manifest.scm".)
>> > This turns out to be unproblematic, because stat:dev and stat:ino is included
>> > as well, though including (a part of) the file name is superfluous because
>> > stat:dev and stat:ino are included.
>> > 
>> > Could you document the rationale for including the file name, and why only
>> > the basename is included instead of the full file name?
>> 
>> Actually it’s probably not useful to include the file (base)name.  I
>> think initially I thought about distinguishing between guix.scm and
>> manifest.scm, since they return different kinds of objects, but dev/ino
>> is probably enough.  WDYT?
>
> Looking at https://lwn.net/Articles/866582/, it appears when BTRFS and NFS are
> combined, it is possible for two dev/ino pairs to be the same for different files.
> It appears to be considered a bug but non-trivial to fix.  Thus, dev/ino apparently
> is not always sufficient, so it may be reasonable to include the file name.
>
> I would include the full file name, because the basename is often rather generic
> ("guix.scm", "manifest.scm"), though this depends on the habits of the user.

OK, that makes sense to me, let’s do that.

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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