GNU bug report logs - #68163
[PATCH] gnu: Prevent stale cache use when `%package-module-path' is parameterized.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: antlers <antlers <at> illucid.net>

Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2023 06:25:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Full log


Message #35 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: antlers <antlers <at> illucid.net>
To: "Simon Tournier" <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>,
 antlers <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>, 68163 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: dev <at> jpoiret.xyz, othacehe <at> gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, me <at> tobias.gr,
 rekado <at> elephly.net, guix <at> cbaines.net
Subject: Re: [bug#68163] [PATCH] gnu: Prevent stale cache use when
 `%package-module-path' is parameterized.
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:32:39 -0800
Updates:

> I don't know if a.) there's any cause to be concerned about the
> performance of this tweak, or b.) that you care to support the
> behavior at all, but I hope I've made my own use-case clear and the
> patch is there if you see fit c:

a.) I glued hyperfine to a pair of guix repl endpoints, scaled up until I hit segfaults, no difference
b.) Maybe `specification->package' just has some particular notion of what's "current", like "current-channels" does, in which case we can rule out complacence with the parameter as a non-feature-- but I certainly isn't the same notion.
c.) I had the bright idea to set GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH at build time, first on the command-line and then in the channel modules, but it didn't work out-- felt silly for a minute there. Hey, how do third party channels usually resolve `search-path'? Isn't that the same thing, packages and patches in the same repo? Or are they just expected to use `local-file' and relative paths? I'll look into this another time.

If B or C had come to fruition I'd have closed the issue with 'em, and something like B is up for interpretation-- I don't mind either way (happy to carry the patch on my own). But if I enjoy these instances of syntax-sugar in my own channels (which I do :p), and if the Guix repo utilizes + is cleaner for them as well, then I figure it'd be a shame (barring a solution like C) to interpret the implementation as one which excludes other channels.




This bug report was last modified 1 year and 154 days ago.

Previous Next


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