From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: myglc2 Subject: bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 10:13:49 -0400 Message-ID: <86vap8yf36.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20170223211156.GA24382@jasmine> <877f429kju.fsf@gnu.org> <87wpc1k0e5.fsf@netris.org> <87efy9gyr5.fsf@gnu.org> <87k27wporb.fsf@netris.org> <877f1oua8u.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50733) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d8SNT-00049w-3a for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d8SNP-0003xe-41 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:34146) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d8SNP-0003wL-1S for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d8SNO-0002hs-Cy for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <877f1oua8u.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Wed, 10 May 2017 15:12:01 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 25852@debbugs.gnu.org On 05/10/2017 at 15:12 Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hi there, > > Mark H Weaver skribis: > >> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: >> >>> Mark H Weaver skribis: >>> >>>> We could simply issue a warning if the version of guix currently in use >>>> is more than N hours old, on the assumption that after N hours it's >>>> likely to be stale. The default value of N might be in the range 48-96 >>>> (2-4 days). A quick perusal through the recent commit log on our mast= er >>>> branch indicates that it's quite rare for 4 days to pass without a >>>> security update. >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>> >>> That sounds like an easy and reasonable approach. >>> >>> I wonder what would be the best place to emit this warning. Upon =E2= =80=98guix >>> package -i=E2=80=99 maybe? >> >> Also "guix package -u" and the "guix system" commands that build >> systems. I suspect that many users run "guix pull" as their normal >> users but never think to run it as root. > > If there are no objections, I=E2=80=99ll push the attached patch. It set= s a > default value of 7 days (which I think is already more aggressive that > what many are doing), which can be overridden with > GUIX_DISTRO_AGE_WARNING. > > Ludo=E2=80=99. How about extending this ...=20 > + (warning (G_ "Your Guix installation is getting old. Consider > +running 'guix pull' followed by '~a' to get up-to-date > +packages and security updates.\n") ... to inform the user how old the installation is?