From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zerodaysfordays@sdf.lonestar.org (Jakob L. Kreuze) Subject: bug#36855: guix system switch-generation doesn't Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:33:18 -0400 Message-ID: <87y2zdnnrl.fsf__16000.9061962896$1567017269$gmane$org@sdf.lonestar.org> References: <7BE8190F-A8E9-454E-8F37-FBFE42FBDE10@vllmrt.net> <87zhkkojfv.fsf@dustycloud.org> <877e7on3zd.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> <87h86ry5j5.fsf@gmail.com> <874l241bq6.fsf__35802.4716888153$1566814098$gmane$org@gnu.org> <87woezoj3p.fsf__10757.9769611888$1566845612$gmane$org@netris.org> <87tva2m8ki.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60514) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i32lf-0000E9-EN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:34:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i32le-0000p8-8H for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:34:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42383) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i32le-0000op-53 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:34:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i32le-0004YL-0o for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:34:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87tva2m8ki.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:34:10 -0400") 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: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, 36855@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hi Mark, Mark H Weaver writes: > Hello again, > > Mark H Weaver writes: > >> As a bonus, this approach might solve another issue I've observed: on my >> Guix system, where I build everything locally, several derivations are >> built *during* activation. Based on the terminal output, I get the >> impression that the system is compiling things while the system in an >> intermediate state, when some of the activation steps have been done, >> but not all of them. >> >> As I recall, the derivations built during activation are limited to >> compiled modules for Guile, but it still sometimes takes on the order of >> a minute or two on my laptop to complete the "activating system" steps. >> This seems suboptimal. >> >> The next time I update my system, I'll try to remember to keep a >> transcript of this, so that I can be more specific. > > Here's a transcript: > > activating system... > building /gnu/store/fbp6bbxw9cf617fmk57sddrz7zfsfw5p-module-import-compiled.drv... > building /gnu/store/wfi6hnr9ggal0s1d32xx5wbl5k5wqlvx-switch-to-system.scm.drv... > making '/gnu/store/mjzk53ia3bajn08lscpyzz5apcw3r70g-system' the current system... > setting up setuid programs in '/run/setuid-programs'... > populating /etc from /gnu/store/l7r1has973n26hfqrs6vxbi94xzgh360-etc... > building /gnu/store/h2fqcxv3xx14lkdhyphm3lawkayw7sdl-module-import-compiled.drv... > building /gnu/store/dar9smjyxmri6v6cchnmp5mpyiimyx64-install-bootloader.scm.drv... > guix system: bootloader successfully installed on '/dev/sda' > building /gnu/store/vkk3h5p799lfpmf6msdhrzlq0wqvk3zq-module-import-compiled.drv... > building /gnu/store/hn8sr8p13gg2mf379xawscabckp03fkb-upgrade-shepherd-services.scm.drv... > shepherd: Evaluating user expression (let* ((services (map primitive-load (?))) # ?) ?). > guix system: warning: only 3.9% of free space available on /gnu/store > hint: Consider deleting old profile generations and collecting garbage, along these lines: > > guix gc --delete-generations=1m > > Mark Thanks for the input; I wasn't aware that the activation process was taking so long for some people. One of Ludovic's suggestions was to create a single derivation, rather than three, to speed up system activation. I'll look into this further. Regards, Jakob --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEa1VJLOiXAjQ2BGSm9Qb9Fp2P2VoFAl1myO4ACgkQ9Qb9Fp2P 2Vo4AA/9FVJyp6OfbInjB/I0Ds27/CbzT3AO+EB4Oy0XYbQtowNhIcraLR0/yxRh 9Zar+zosHG/WOtA9UI76KZL3ZopijwRO+JFe6X6F9iNmwBBf8J5TyL4OmIHR+a/4 NlGbvZauS18HXzrrcV7NN1MpVWLLaHacM5DAboCDUFW2a+u4NaJOwC3yu/1lCaIe oAhBo9Tlde/xb8kiMHrmmGxAFUXiXOZ4tOeS6E1G9yWkqPlAbfzVyvCtnM2K3xVx BLudy3MvbCX4Fid12kTiAAOpjM/G4mQmY+99pf5Edv/f8iHhfNiQ6YZk5Wt265MN UUxi2G0PX3lNONO9YUbD0KKZAEmAaS4QVab2LpqBBcTw2axQ5CfYYgh1MobgU5Vi j18EkXEMj6rQ3Xp/6c1B2kBTKG3oUqChaaX+caOg9bXKoSq3GTdiT/mY6t/KxkQF 47no41V5YhgrC6LHVZ3f9wk/yjh0DorRy/kMyI5/E7Zwhv5h+6cA1xFsPIdIkQ6y V96+Voz2TFqOLs4kFmPVWNWN5ceTqgXPXBqv847aLOelLoWu0njHUUJLf0LjeGm4 ptZbtnt6a60MCEM6mxqmx7Z6qizVofYOLwNP0k9iURkVKyHYqmJRCZFcm8FlfbMV Xf4NQ1x5CMWXI4O8jhk1Lzwagg4tk3JjBweUTx0K61oufEZsADg= =8OXh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--