From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Aug 21 02:49:41 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Aug 2022 06:49:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33723 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oPemC-0000WK-V3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 02:49:41 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:35942) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oPemB-0000WA-CL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 02:49:39 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45062) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oPem9-0001Pl-R9 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 02:49:39 -0400 Received: from mx0.riseup.net ([198.252.153.6]:55782) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oPem7-0001zq-Sx for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 02:49:37 -0400 Received: from fews1.riseup.net (fews1-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.riseup.net", Issuer "R3" (not verified)) by mx0.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4M9R1V1Yxlz9sYr for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 06:49:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1661064574; bh=YDPWN5+4vRk+cx0aSQBbDqRCVzblHSDoxDjE2SkULR8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=cGISRvcbL1XzBqxSbXFfUAmhlaxnLbnVzeXr/xHO2qipfYBjlWBISTpC41KjPPaCd q8NEQ4HdTNpXynCUL0rXbVMbGSKZUr6XLklqE7NRl9RG3A9tOExfilJzyr1RLumjXp kbsOe/W1mOgYKVdXVbQT/zNqZ+fFBWwhEJuSImI4= X-Riseup-User-ID: D840BF28DEFE1E83762A6A5FF57FC89F31F010FA095DDF9019B0FD5A128E7BD2 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4M9R1T5CZBz5vTr for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 06:49:33 +0000 (UTC) From: Csepp To: Bug reports for GNU Guix Subject: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2022 08:39:02 +0200 Message-ID: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.252.153.6; envelope-from=raingloom@riseup.net; helo=mx0.riseup.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) I'd like to figure out what Guix will try to build before I run an upgrade on my netbook, so I always use --dry-run. I'm pretty sure in the past it used to show more information, but today it just showed that it will download 20 megs, without saying what package that 20 megs are for, which ones will be built, which ones are downloaded, or anything useful at all. And now I see it's building Caja. Why did it not warn me beforehand? No idea. This should go without saying, but this is pretty bad UX. Is there something that can be done about this? The upgrade process on less powerful machines is pretty awful currently. Side note: I plan to work on a patch that adds an option to upgrade that keeps everything that would require local building at its previous version. Hopefully I won't need to use the --do-not-upgrade option after that. Right now upgrading is a multi-hour manual process, which honestly sucks. With that patch it would still take a while but at least it would run automatically. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Aug 21 04:44:58 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Aug 2022 08:44:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33787 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oPgZm-0003Gp-9s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 04:44:58 -0400 Received: from tilde.team ([198.50.210.248]:37584 ident=postfix) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oPgZj-0003Gg-R1 for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 04:44:56 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [63.228.59.248]) by tilde.team (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 31DF84C182B; Sun, 21 Aug 2022 08:44:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tilde.team; s=mail; t=1661071495; bh=i8PZu6AY2iwntC0W+/cwzMgIHRa1gDcWAA+LqzKlOX4=; h=Date:Cc:Subject:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Au0Ck9yCVKWksmL1v3QYo1+3au2pPYTKPOTbvjjmSP3+QOfuTqL3OYAmfuWOTP0Ma VdOYJ6jYLlnRFrA9SPOOi88kfkD7dFLax7xrxpahRYfR9kYGIO1TpSdzhlvwjTO5vA bYDDhrxxHAHsnZqhRvYCJ+ar+wAPRTBWsqUXpMBQ= Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2022 03:44:53 -0500 Message-Id: Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless From: "bdju" To: "Csepp" , <57315@debbugs.gnu.org> X-Mailer: aerc 0.9.0 References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> In-Reply-To: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) On Sun Aug 21, 2022 at 1:39 AM CDT, Csepp wrote: > This should go without saying, but this is pretty bad UX. > > Is there something that can be done about this? The upgrade process on > less powerful machines is pretty awful currently. Agreed. Upgrading on Guix can be pretty horrible. Especially when you find out you're seemingly the only user of certain packages so you hit a bunch of build failures that you would've expected to be found and fixed already, and you have to skip and/or report them and redo the upgrades repeatedly. On most distros I would upgrade daily without worry, but with Guix System I end up putting it off a week or two and trying to plan out a time when I don't mind my CPU being maxed out entirely with builds and such. > Side note: I plan to work on a patch that adds an option to upgrade that > keeps everything that would require local building at its previous > version. Hopefully I won't need to use the --do-not-upgrade option > after that. Right now upgrading is a multi-hour manual process, which > honestly sucks. With that patch it would still take a while but at > least it would run automatically. This sounds like a nice feature. I've wished for the ability to use guix manifests but skip certain packages when there are issues, but if I could use manifests along with an option like this, that'd accomplish what I wanted anyway in most cases. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Aug 31 05:26:19 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2022 09:26:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38203 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTJz3-0006Hi-9X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:26:19 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37286) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTJz0-0006HC-IC for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:26:03 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45912) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTJyu-0005mt-73; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:25:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=9TlKLU+gaTNdrUk5Cy2YXTt5SMm8r5r/QlZh9vAukaA=; b=oQzPCAd8thyTTmlO7IRN 6j6ps3nlVMlzJud1YQPvYzBG1QGXLepyyZnB5K5N31ADTyQIxf3IcW2A0S/hapN8o3UNd8TiRl4cz mE6/hT5KFtQTEyrADkOblARn6WWQ3gn6d28rriCuR69UgqUiWJlNbqI1MNgQm463GylQ9moGh0RVF c62KWz8FJ8/AP6FDAEsoPAsVdARPw4dUYJ38/cNGMnr4Z383mf7Zx+nmW50rcQN8jGMSyFiw49QLz gLiv+BNjx0vMitMeZIkgfIflvAyY/WuGbrWcqbWO2gHxtCrkR2Go4gWehjZCaKxKkcHPQi9LqMMRh gyCbXLhf67Ztmg==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:53262 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTJys-0001Ib-Nn; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:25:54 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: "bdju" Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:25:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: (bdju@tilde.team's message of "Sun, 21 Aug 2022 03:44:53 -0500") Message-ID: <87r10wdasf.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 Cc: 57315@debbugs.gnu.org, Csepp X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, "bdju" skribis: > On Sun Aug 21, 2022 at 1:39 AM CDT, Csepp wrote: >> This should go without saying, but this is pretty bad UX. >> >> Is there something that can be done about this? The upgrade process on >> less powerful machines is pretty awful currently. > Agreed. Upgrading on Guix can be pretty horrible. Especially when you > find out you're seemingly the only user of certain packages so you hit a > bunch of build failures that you would've expected to be found and fixed > already, and you have to skip and/or report them and redo the upgrades > repeatedly. On most distros I would upgrade daily without worry, but > with Guix System I end up putting it off a week or two and trying to > plan out a time when I don't mind my CPU being maxed out entirely with > builds and such. That=E2=80=99s a pretty bad experience that we should improve (my personal experience is nicer: I upgrade my system and home roughly weekly and usually without having to build anything locally). Now, I think it=E2=80=99s a mistake to =E2=80=9Cexpect=E2=80=9D build failu= res =E2=80=9Cto be found and fixed already=E2=80=9D: you=E2=80=99re part of the process, you too can fin= d, report, and fix build failures. Of course one has other obligations in life too, but if each one of us does a small part, it=E2=80=99ll work better. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Aug 31 05:28:37 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2022 09:28:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38208 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1V-0006LE-2r for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:37 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41426) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1T-0006L0-7H for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:35 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45724) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1O-00067c-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=dc5w+wrWK4LE20yKma9a5aZihQx54/+k0XmyKrxXc7Q=; b=ps1ovdqTzwLXR8W83R7V hPm/ezEW0jpu+yMvMKPSQfM1wDcpxF8Au+lYZd09V23blW03H5oUUXJ/N01XhQDoqCL/JfvGUAL+u tahbOj4cj8fYRWs1Mz3B7QIAKS40r3yyJL+KCv63VVKU1szBMwx4lOsujPsbodRTeQrAOEbq3U1vb gDbfaJQVwUL5iIhwFB4JI+dAPVyQcjF41VfFNvPlHdBG0PKXAlKdkk3zjPelb9y5gJXdqxCz2t+kQ WEsEwRraWMNpkKbcuCGfmacPHLDBLit+8EjRA25YYGh9B7A6WP4f7anGHvoThHqMzpUtLeIb/Acrh YWR2VufKZgMhNg==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:63219 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1N-0001rq-6N; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:29 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Csepp Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:28:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> (Csepp's message of "Sun, 21 Aug 2022 08:39:02 +0200") Message-ID: <87k06odao5.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 Cc: 57315@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Csepp skribis: > I'd like to figure out what Guix will try to build before I run an > upgrade on my netbook, so I always use --dry-run. I'm pretty sure in > the past it used to show more information, but today it just showed that > it will download 20 megs, without saying what package that 20 megs are > for, which ones will be built, which ones are downloaded, or anything > useful at all. > > And now I see it's building Caja. Why did it not warn me beforehand? > No idea. I understand this is a source of confusion. It has to do with =E2=80=9Cgra= fts=E2=80=9D (which themselves are about applying security updates): if substitutes for a package are missing, Guix has a partial view of the dependency graph, which is why it can only tell you about extra builds/downloads later on in the process (it does report them, only later). (If you=E2=80=99re curious, see for details.) Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Aug 31 05:28:49 2022 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2022 09:28:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38212 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1h-0006Lf-CP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:49 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35018) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1f-0006LS-BB for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:47 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42946) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1a-00068Q-43 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:Subject:From:To:Date:in-reply-to: references; bh=X2QG/Jhj3rOTVTd7Rx9m9yPu9CTu9an8afuWF4/Kkbg=; b=iySWMC9gix19Bx RSA05B0UFi/CMdECEq89aO1ZSRk5moZ7dSdac1bHdp/x+6eKh48n3RZkkuKv74b4B6TONlqDLVyKq bel1TtQ/Rx4YQKyFuJsnJ6EQZHmbd5Gw3/TS+nbUccgAnhjVW67jJb8SNk63DCpiQPYhJBixNVGpG FUABXu8vEhCcgrx1pBqM3oIEA1ZF5Hg9zIJmqEhq54izd94RCUFBoO/V0g7ESTCS4uj1BDxybb+EI RXf1liPmS8NdHxUPFfjffx5zHMXRaYvbzD1axGSOlI8qOS/sGOAsfpkXjL+0VZ037tXnYL6J3+o+G 8fFQQ0ojVUxzHQ7weV8A==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:55212 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTK1Z-0001sY-OC for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:28:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:28:39 +0200 Message-Id: <87ilm8dans.fsf@gnu.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: control message for bug #57315 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) tags 57315 notabug close 57315 quit From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Aug 31 08:36:34 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2022 12:36:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38470 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTMxO-0001Gb-1m for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 08:36:34 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com ([209.85.221.48]:36760) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTMxJ-0001GK-0R for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 08:36:32 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id bu22so17745883wrb.3 for <57315@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:36:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc; bh=+5VXHwm8aGT9lXzuerW8GJBc2HEwv1EgqfzIBBQ6reQ=; b=SeTu05GLYApgTnNkpi6RLQdCGAaf5SgzWd3G30W838q6y3PCupvItsRqM4Bk6FnWx0 HkkyzDKgKkeo6PNuJuXRRPNPIfAS5PjVIJkn4fZI34x3NZxvZSqUxWjPRCq9CFM+mDd8 tpEp/Fp8hn/UEoYoNBncEfnyNaATzvuACRTp9l4+/Gm4JjJbVajYLH9wTxX6N9uBPHU8 B1AH+8b+jWrGDkXcHT1jK3EVK+mpy4BfpLIbc3NmemwFztv73bL1qeQI8gMEMlH8lacR MRv//2EDvCEwD3HTjcaVGmIvzzwTNFSlm/As9Ph66LUftVWH+nUGJhuXOmrsxg2+Rdz/ EcYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=+5VXHwm8aGT9lXzuerW8GJBc2HEwv1EgqfzIBBQ6reQ=; b=7Whg3tykuaq2SBh6EyQxKRjPda4KpikV8ifJA2+Cg7thnXsIJrEDz1ISnE0cNewoTU PKQBVHfc1JUG0xAqK3kLw0cFxtnRYXor20oy1eLJ8JzYj7KBfet4hHArqUbf76ySbhoI FYL7O08tGHFTlFB2C5otcp4hN5wdNUv4gM9QwMheryiIFzDhezRN5ll5h/1SMlGbB5Wd rA3N4m5hxdki7rQLzg5ASxE8wBOHvNPHoNol8p8irICdOCQxXv7aL07+Dp84UDg612nS gnoPoUil899vnz4JDxKJ3SuWd5AB/EHtRpRj0ss7YO/yjwey/8+JnacFxtnVnELbBhp3 eBBA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0atmKDocU7jrlGY1l29LvjOodlblusugvtVILRjKrVY9xKVkgT 8Hlm7y9AdbKcYBJ8FDUp92fmtc3OZWw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR6IeJvUquLT6aiyz1kqvW+70LAx07IpPrtY+XiSGeAN7bXDasR/u24EmVlGl+JG9BiBq5crGQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:64eb:0:b0:225:74d5:7b07 with SMTP id g11-20020a5d64eb000000b0022574d57b07mr12587520wri.616.1661949382884; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:36:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t12-20020a05600c198c00b003a2e92edeccsm2122208wmq.46.2022.08.31.05.36.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 31 Aug 2022 05:36:22 -0700 (PDT) From: zimoun To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Csepp Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless In-Reply-To: <87k06odao5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> <87k06odao5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 14:29:42 +0200 Message-ID: <865yi8d2a1.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 Cc: 57315@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, Just to mention this report is somehow a duplicate of bug#40612 [1]. Maybe, they could be merged. WDYT? 1: On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 11:28, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > I understand this is a source of confusion. It has to do with =E2=80=9Cg= rafts=E2=80=9D > (which themselves are about applying security updates): if substitutes > for a package are missing, Guix has a partial view of the dependency > graph, which is why it can only tell you about extra builds/downloads > later on in the process (it does report them, only later). > > (If you=E2=80=99re curious, see > for details.) Nice read! Quoting: [...] do a first pass lowering packages to derivations as if grafting was disabled, build all these derivations, and then do a second pass to determine which packages in the graph need to be grafted and to compute the relevant grafting derivation. [...] If we reify that second pass to the user interface code, it also addresses the user interface issue by allowing it to display, possibly, two build plans: the =E2=80=9Cungrafted=E2=80=9D one followed by the grafted one. Currently, these 2 plans are not well-exposed, IMHO. What it is expected (at least by me ;-)) when running =E2=80=9C--dry-run=E2=80=9D is t= o have a picture about what would going on. For example, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ guix package -i opensurge --dry-run guix package: warning: Your Guix installation is 12 days old. guix package: warning: Consider running 'guix pull' followed by 'guix package -u' to get up-to-date packages and security updates. The following package would be installed: opensurge 0.5.2.1 substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://ci.guix.gnu.org'... 100.0% substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://bordeaux.guix.gnu.org'... 10= 0.0% The following derivation would be built: /gnu/store/r89hmhbxwm3gs1jl2dhns7gnwvi2k6s1-opensurge-0.5.2.1.drv 42.1 MB would be downloaded --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- What does it mean? Does it mean the substitute is missing? Or does it mean grafting is missing? Does it mean I am going to download 42.1MB and then a =E2=80=9Cquick=E2=80=9D application of grafts? Or does it mean = I am going to build from source the package and these 42.1MB correspond to source and build-time dependencies? When I run the option =E2=80=99--dry-run=E2=80=99, I accept to pay a bit mo= re and then compute as much as possible of derivations to have the most complete as possible graph to know beforehand and as accurately as possible: 1. what I need to download as substitutes 2. what I need to compile from source 3. what require grafts, e.g., require 1 graft for openal-1.20.1 ... require 4 grafts for sfml-2.5.1 ... require 6 grafts for mars-0.7.5.1.c855d04 ... Sometime, the plan looks exactly like that. Sometime, it is really confusing and you have unpleasant surprises when running it. Obviously, it is not as easy as it appears because of all the dynamic dependencies are not straightforward to track ahead of time. ;-) However, I also find the output of =E2=80=99--dry-run=E2=80=99 not enough r= eliable and I use a cross-finger* approach when I update. :-) Cheers, simon *cross-finger approach: Running Debian, I cross my fingers when I upgrade because many things can break and it is hard to roll back. Running Guix, I cross my fingers because the dry-run does not tell me some substitutes can be missing and then Guix automatically launches a local build=E2=80=A6 which often ends by=E2=80=A6 a build failure. Heh! No= free lunch. ;-) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Sep 01 08:05:33 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2022 12:05:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41473 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTiwu-0002zP-TQ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 08:05:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51670) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTiwt-0002zD-CP for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 08:05:32 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35236) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTiwn-00048Q-PK; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 08:05:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=9nYN5XP57PV3uqxDsFjejZljkPsfQUyRpq++CemsEp8=; b=C8Ncqs1OFld4SnlspKo8 TLZdqssB02aubP0dDvtIMqhAfo+E7JUWIi8+yOjGJhxzKWViszFiK0pTo0KWIMGV6h/UDwkzljbMm AugwgU+ipQ5kVWDr/sMpiQQQ8ioTaPhuhfNTVhB5pXRmX8omrcrkAUQxLH0SEiOzuNxcTQZ5Zq/tE VE0PopeZfvsfLo+R9PzwlkqxK7Q3k2ki5nl5aC2TQXN5rYEC/jt/1Os1SMiEHzogXo4euOsAGUwI7 b+4miFcpPrOaWzE0gegk+i+kbKPeaF+W798ATVbb6+nFl63hxRIShJGfUDXwvwkY+PluDOUSqtDnX F71Wuw8GMAN3vQ==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201]:54078 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oTiwV-0007Vr-Iv; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 08:05:24 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: zimoun Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> <87k06odao5.fsf@gnu.org> <865yi8d2a1.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Quintidi 15 Fructidor an 230 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9?= =?utf-8?Q?volution=2C?= jour de la Truite X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2022 14:05:04 +0200 In-Reply-To: <865yi8d2a1.fsf@gmail.com> (zimoun's message of "Wed, 31 Aug 2022 14:29:42 +0200") Message-ID: <87mtbj47wv.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 Cc: 57315@debbugs.gnu.org, Csepp X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, zimoun skribis: > Just to mention this report is somehow a duplicate of bug#40612 [1]. > Maybe, they could be merged. WDYT? Yes, please. >> (If you=E2=80=99re curious, see >> for details.) > > Nice read! Quoting: > > [...] do a first pass lowering packages to derivations as if > grafting was disabled, build all these derivations, and then do > a second pass to determine which packages in the graph need to > be grafted and to compute the relevant grafting > derivation. [...] If we reify that second pass to the user > interface code, it also addresses the user interface issue by > allowing it to display, possibly, two build plans: the > =E2=80=9Cungrafted=E2=80=9D one followed by the grafted one. > > Currently, these 2 plans are not well-exposed, IMHO. When there are two or more passes, each one is printed as soon as possible. So you see =E2=80=9CX MiB will be downloaded=E2=80=9D or similar= messages in the middle of the process. > $ guix package -i opensurge --dry-run > guix package: warning: Your Guix installation is 12 days old. > guix package: warning: Consider running 'guix pull' followed by > 'guix package -u' to get up-to-date packages and security updates. > > The following package would be installed: > opensurge 0.5.2.1 > > substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://ci.guix.gnu.org'... 100.0% > substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://bordeaux.guix.gnu.org'... = 100.0% > The following derivation would be built: > /gnu/store/r89hmhbxwm3gs1jl2dhns7gnwvi2k6s1-opensurge-0.5.2.1.drv > > 42.1 MB would be downloaded > > What does it mean? That you=E2=80=99ll download 42M of dependencies and then build opensurge. =E2=80=9CThe following derivation would be built=E2=80=9D is about building= derivations that are not grafts. For grafts, you would see =E2=80=9CThe following graf= t =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D, and only at verbosity level 2 or more (see =E2=80=98show-what-to-build=E2= =80=99). [...] > When I run the option =E2=80=99--dry-run=E2=80=99, I accept to pay a bit = more and then > compute as much as possible of derivations to have the most complete as > possible graph to know beforehand and as accurately as possible: > > 1. what I need to download as substitutes > 2. what I need to compile from source > 3. what require grafts, e.g., > > require 1 graft for openal-1.20.1 ... > require 4 grafts for sfml-2.5.1 ... > require 6 grafts for mars-0.7.5.1.c855d04 ... > > Sometime, the plan looks exactly like that. Sometime, it is really > confusing and you have unpleasant surprises when running it. By definition, the whole plan cannot be known in advance in the presence of dynamic dependencies such as grafts, so it=E2=80=99s hard to do better. The way it=E2=80=99s implemented right now is not optimal strictly speaking= in that we might bail out before we have a complete picture of everything that=E2=80=99s known statically beforehand. In practice though I think it= =E2=80=99s doing an okay job from that perspective. Cheers, Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Sep 01 13:29:36 2022 Received: (at 57315) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2022 17:29:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44096 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTo0W-0001iw-CJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 13:29:36 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com ([209.85.221.51]:35813) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oTo0T-0001iM-KK for 57315@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 13:29:34 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id s7so8377240wro.2 for <57315@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 10:29:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc; bh=VUjQMt3ryZFvA+QMgg2hgDzfX3AO7h0Sc0KaOsH+f54=; b=gjePjpYeyBmGLZ6U4KMlZutZCQhnwx1ADW3dbg47xF8XwDxleaaI/waz72Mrr0Lh0/ Az2FpMbINUG0mLUO343iemTKZjVkwNT8lkr9Gl2WgN84IqE0TkffcBSpXsC+7Wycliw0 zAgWYnoH5n+tREcZE6UnniBYxdPzPFwcYNTjP5916sTmoMf8K44e4kYmjZdma0PckdPF UGfxopl8d6z3HQX1T8ipToZJcHW7y4s2NZAb5ArzpkI4TiXQtfbvYo4eZahQux5C3lAX 5CYiZX736pVKRFdXE0TzC3OsNsTxc/aBsJdmVx2OyZyn+K+3R1GrgjuR1hB07Wcie1/t Sp5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=VUjQMt3ryZFvA+QMgg2hgDzfX3AO7h0Sc0KaOsH+f54=; b=lFhPOA+chP2h8VlwhJi/OMf+K/horzoZH9SJaIrgKkQdsWD7jih8vTmgW152rXOUIF TH3Sj7mezt79i2wl25CsDDx8KpHxsKQaCuaXx6FVjT7qCvD8YnHk6HAy/xag5a/tEDGr 0oF72ikap1rIpIW9ZZUYCvUZTu8TSrhLTm3b+6aMBQRz9Kdf8j/YBZWYYfX8037v9qeB G10USJ6X2N9xE7siNy38UOxebFG+a9vJcUVpX3k3hNkfc1kxMoyTGptFRvP87oO1TvZY SyJYRHYsuhszufyEoOLmi7TKlY1maKiwZgfxxrspvnpPKdG/4zvB5FoZMVXvO8wJP2H4 3JFg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0sUxOaZYj27itiP9POunf68k+lh5B6v3sxKmGDa0t7ctHoyh8Z 7cYW6/0SS8skQJRS9NSTg80= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7C0Kw1Wj+yR9QQ1QQ5hYLsf2ykRALLwFAoQX/ZrH5NRaVTeH15MfHPZ2hSeRpmqbyImTbyHw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:887:b0:21e:24a0:f302 with SMTP id ca7-20020a056000088700b0021e24a0f302mr14751347wrb.466.1662053367968; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 10:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bq25-20020a5d5a19000000b0021e519eba9bsm10502948wrb.42.2022.09.01.10.29.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 01 Sep 2022 10:29:27 -0700 (PDT) From: zimoun To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: bug#57315: guix upgrade --dry-run output is basically useless In-Reply-To: <87mtbj47wv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87pmgu3xc6.fsf@riseup.net> <87k06odao5.fsf@gnu.org> <865yi8d2a1.fsf@gmail.com> <87mtbj47wv.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2022 19:19:43 +0200 Message-ID: <87y1v3t3kg.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 57315 Cc: 57315@debbugs.gnu.org, Csepp X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, Thanks for explaining. On jeu., 01 sept. 2022 at 14:05, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Just to mention this report is somehow a duplicate of bug#40612 [1]. >> Maybe, they could be merged. WDYT? > > Yes, please. Done. >> $ guix package -i opensurge --dry-run >> guix package: warning: Your Guix installation is 12 days old. >> guix package: warning: Consider running 'guix pull' followed by >> 'guix package -u' to get up-to-date packages and security updates. >> >> The following package would be installed: >> opensurge 0.5.2.1 >> >> substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://ci.guix.gnu.org'... 100.0% >> substitute: updating substitutes from 'https://bordeaux.guix.gnu.org'...= 100.0% >> The following derivation would be built: >> /gnu/store/r89hmhbxwm3gs1jl2dhns7gnwvi2k6s1-opensurge-0.5.2.1.drv >> >> 42.1 MB would be downloaded >> >> What does it mean? > > That you=E2=80=99ll download 42M of dependencies and then build opensurge. > > =E2=80=9CThe following derivation would be built=E2=80=9D is about buildi= ng derivations > that are not grafts. For grafts, you would see =E2=80=9CThe following gr= aft =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D, > and only at verbosity level 2 or more (see =E2=80=98show-what-to-build=E2= =80=99). Well, the UI does not appear clear to me. >> When I run the option =E2=80=99--dry-run=E2=80=99, I accept to pay a bit= more and then >> compute as much as possible of derivations to have the most complete as >> possible graph to know beforehand and as accurately as possible: >> >> 1. what I need to download as substitutes >> 2. what I need to compile from source >> 3. what require grafts, e.g., >> >> require 1 graft for openal-1.20.1 ... >> require 4 grafts for sfml-2.5.1 ... >> require 6 grafts for mars-0.7.5.1.c855d04 ... >> >> Sometime, the plan looks exactly like that. Sometime, it is really >> confusing and you have unpleasant surprises when running it. > > By definition, the whole plan cannot be known in advance in the presence > of dynamic dependencies such as grafts, so it=E2=80=99s hard to do better. > > The way it=E2=80=99s implemented right now is not optimal strictly speaki= ng in > that we might bail out before we have a complete picture of everything > that=E2=80=99s known statically beforehand. In practice though I think i= t=E2=80=99s > doing an okay job from that perspective. Well, I understand that using the current implementation, it is not possible to know the complete plan beforehand. I agree that for most of the cases, it is enough. However, I still miss why it is not possible to compute the whole graph of derivations. This complete graph is potentially a bit expensive to compute but I accept to paid this cost to have a better plan. Cheers, simon From unknown Mon Aug 18 18:01:54 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 11:24:05 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator