From unknown Sat Jun 14 19:45:36 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#71360: large manifests when adding packages Resent-From: Dariqq Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 11:39:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 71360 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 71360@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.171750110920558 (code B ref -1); Tue, 04 Jun 2024 11:39:01 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2024 11:38:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41866 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sESUm-0005LU-Gs for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 07:38:28 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:50784) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sESUj-0005LI-Up for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 07:38:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sESUW-0007jX-7s for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 07:38:12 -0400 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sESUT-0002uO-KQ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 07:38:11 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA5C8240029 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:38:05 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1717501085; bh=Ofl5+Lzla6Ccbf1TKWjTkM3SoLEYU03AqHTKZd2JLlU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To:From:Subject:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=CbQQskoA/t7XbPkHAJZ3RAfLM0cUgwL/yG1vv4pVqfOodLTdFUELjbceHZrQ9UGRZ Oz3FFfvWoa3DVc9d7tfhBT17V5lWWleLDbg2+YEgLRRu+AZ2K+opyqLx5TlBJf8DJ5 9BAXFRE3ZMlXp0uc3Pt6yjzRe+b6rWDTXXKGEOAfT2+TOOTOQ0EYIVXd4Qu5dJfH/e EfR2KIh1jM8QrGsMx9cu062o3WUriYjaR2U4yHdFOnbGnKGqd/AH4LEq+CvGLNUsAd VrKGhOhWAwxK6JsCfdbp6NgKxrKKkKKHGs+GjhdRkJ599r3DS22TPlbpD9L8E/IC29 JPgKimWJ6BZRw== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4VtpW1169sz9rxL for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:38:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <253771a3-f41d-4888-9fa1-0b4ac761c59e@posteo.net> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 11:38:02 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US From: Dariqq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=dariqq@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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: -1.3 (-) 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: -2.3 (--) Hi Guix, I was trying to figure out if the "repeated" tag inside a profiles manifest file is reliable to detect duplicate entries in a profile. While it was working fine for my home and system profile for the normal .guix-profile it was not: This is related to https://issues.guix.gnu.org/55499#0 resp. https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=4ff12d1de7cd617b791996ee7ca1240660b4c20e which marks duplicate entries in a profiles as repeated inside the profile manifest file. * Steps to reproduce To stick with the original example: Instead of adding the r packages all in one add them one by one #+begin_example guix package -p /tmp/wrong -i r-cicero-monocle3 guix package -p /tmp/wrong -i r-monocle3 #+end_example The resulting manifest file at /tmp/wrong/manifest has the huge tree for r-monocle3 twice. So the lookup mechanism in manifest->gexp does not seem to work with the install mechanism of profiles. I haven't looked more deeply into it yet. An smaller example is using zlib and glib (which propagates zlib). * Expected Behaviour It should not matter whether you install things in multiple transactions or in one. Thanks. From unknown Sat Jun 14 19:45:36 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#71360: large manifests when adding packages Resent-From: Dariqq Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 17:45:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 71360 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 71360@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 71360-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B71360.171752306912249 (code B ref 71360); Tue, 04 Jun 2024 17:45:03 +0000 Received: (at 71360) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2024 17:44:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41701 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sEYCy-0003BR-3r for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 13:44:28 -0400 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:46631) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sEYCs-0003An-38 for 71360@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 13:44:26 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B093240027 for <71360@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:35:32 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1717522533; bh=GL24G8uMNGpZnqNZoZs2/8cOJPLeCKhMkTk6xVcxMG8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=NTR91f8lHRa6mpElPmqyLnMb9GHJNyCM028VE7jb19h3U8HKr1RtefzT9kr+3lDzM Gbld/5uWjw77HTOmXlHcZV7neMGOnlnbzeJeLc1AgEwSUJqvLpHTm7iJEZqduiCi+s FfXBaoHEWRUnNJ40GUsQND/OfcGWEvip3y/L0pb/aqKkCfHF4p6MIpGU58y+woSkrg vzpzyeqE8gntYllsJ25CwR3aaZwwgDJccCG2pOFBQejK1s6Y86Ke4rbXo77x1gCWkK m7BQg05YlMgVZ+UveM4Df5GKch5jQoAAWBm041koVYYnzFSc15C5rlckbCR2lgKoxb zHeVoaPa3KMOQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4VtyRS3tCRz6ty9 for <71360@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:35:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <946c8da8-e70f-4c9a-b4e0-1c070be15ac1@posteo.net> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:35:28 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Dariqq References: <253771a3-f41d-4888-9fa1-0b4ac761c59e@posteo.net> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <253771a3-f41d-4888-9fa1-0b4ac761c59e@posteo.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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 (---) I think (maybe part of) the problem is that inside entry->gexp in manifest->gexp things get compared using (the hash of) (manifest-entry-item entry) which will be a package object for the new entries but a store path "/gnu/store/*" for packages already present in the profile. Also right afterwards we test if the visited previous-entry is 'manifest-entry=?' to entry again causing a potential problem if one has a string and one a package as item entry. Would this be worth fixing? On 04.06.24 13:38, Dariqq wrote: > Hi Guix, > > I was trying to figure out if the "repeated" tag inside a profiles > manifest file is reliable to detect duplicate entries in a profile. > While it was working fine for my home and system profile for the normal > .guix-profile it was not: > > This is related to https://issues.guix.gnu.org/55499#0 resp. > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=4ff12d1de7cd617b791996ee7ca1240660b4c20e which marks duplicate entries in a profiles as repeated inside the profile manifest file. > > * Steps to reproduce > > To stick with the original example: Instead of adding the r packages all > in one add them one by one > > #+begin_example > guix package -p /tmp/wrong -i r-cicero-monocle3 > guix package -p /tmp/wrong -i r-monocle3 > #+end_example > > The resulting manifest file at /tmp/wrong/manifest has the huge tree for > r-monocle3 twice. > > So the lookup mechanism in manifest->gexp does not seem to work with the > install mechanism of profiles. I haven't looked more deeply into it yet. > > An smaller example is using zlib and glib (which propagates zlib). > > * Expected Behaviour > > It should not matter whether you install things in multiple transactions > or in one. > > Thanks.