Subject: Re: bug#65352: Fix time-machine and network

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 17:01:13 +0200

Simon Tournier <[email-masked]> skribis:

> On Mon, 25 Sept 2023 at 11:32, Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>>   1. ‘false-if-git-not-found’ was removed around the call to
>>      ‘commit-lookup’, which breaks things as reported just today on
>>      IRC.  Could you reintroduce it?
>
> About "guix system"?
>
> Yes, for sure let reintroduce it.
>
> But I miss why it would work for one case and not for the other.  I
> was looking at 'check-forward-update'.

‘commit-lookup’ throws to 'git-error when passed a commit that is not
found, that’s why.

>>   2. Short commit IDs are no longer handled in the 'commit case, as I
>>      mentioned before in this thread (and then forgot).  Could you
>>      reintroduce support for them?
>
> Short commit ID are handled by tag-or-commit (guix time-machine and
> guix pull).  If there is a discrepancy elsewhere with short commit ID,
> it should be fixed overthere, IMHO.
>
> Else, I do not understand what you are asking.  From my understanding,
> it would not make sense to have short commit ID handled with (commit .
> "abc123") for some part of the code and (tag-or-commit . "abc123") for
> some other part.

It the caller passes (commit . "1234"), this is no longer handled
efficiently as it used to be.

Maybe that’s a bit of a theoretical issue though because in practice
CLIs would pass (tag-or-commit . "1234"), right?

Thanks for your quick response!

Ludo’.