GNU bug report logs - #55231
[PATCH v1] initrd: Allow extra search paths with ‘initrd-extra-module-paths’

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Brian Cully <bjc <at> spork.org>

Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 19:55:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: moreinfo, patch

Full log


Message #128 received at 55231 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Morgan Arnold <morgan.arnold <at> proton.me>,
 "guix-devel <at> gnu.org" <guix-devel <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com" <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>,
 "ludo <at> gnu.org" <ludo <at> gnu.org>, "55231 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <55231 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 "kaelyn.alexi <at> protonmail.com" <kaelyn.alexi <at> protonmail.com>,
 Ian Eure <ian <at> retrospec.tv>
Subject: Re: Understanding #:substitutable? and #55231
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 11:52:03 +0100
On 9/02/2025 23:42, Morgan Arnold wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As a bit of an aside, I'm wondering if it wouldn't be possible to eliminate the possibility of even potential copyviols by a change to the `derivation` function? It currently sets environment variable for the builder daemon by setting `allowSubstitutes = 0` if `(not substitutable?)`. If non-substitutability were propagated by doing something like instead setting `allowSubstitutes = 0` if `(not substitutable?)` or if `(not (every substitutable-derivation? inputs))`, wouldn't this suffice to ensure that an initrd which contains non-substitutable inputs is properly marked non-substitutable? [...]

This has effectively already been answered.

Best regards,
Maxime Devos





This bug report was last modified 12 days ago.

Previous Next


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