From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?B?VG9tw6HFoSDEjGVjaA==?= Subject: Re: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBwdWJsaXNo?= =?utf-8?B?4oCZ?= now compresses archives Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 18:10:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20160720161029.fs5ee723ro3vfpvi@venom> References: <878twytwlp.fsf@gnu.org> <20160719062915.3cdpmb6xhcg3l6mw@venom> <877fchkbut.fsf@gnu.org> <20160719134245.jyk3m6cs5374bwso@crashnator.suse.cz> <20160719155024.ti4bqvenntoucgmz@crashnator.suse.cz> <20160720130559.n44vau4iysyn7qlz@crashnator.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xjpwahnafg6rkpef" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53726) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bPu54-0000hl-FY for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:10:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bPu4y-0001zE-A3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:10:41 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50616) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bPu4x-0001xR-Mu for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:10:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: "Thompson, David" Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --xjpwahnafg6rkpef Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:12:53AM -0400, Thompson, David wrote: >On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1 =C4=8Cech wrote: > >> First, I'm not saying that we should do that for every archive, but I >> think that having a way how to automatically export this information >> would be great and I see it as a week point for using Guix packages as >> alternative to Snappy or Flatpak. > >I don't really understand the point of this back-and-forth. It's >quite simple: If the user builds the same package expression with the >same version of Guix, they will get the same result if the build is >deterministic. Yes. >I don't understand the contrast with Snappy and Flatpak because they >don't provide this feature at all, opting instead to provide opaque >binaries with no real provenance. Snappy and Flatpak does not provide this feature but Guix could. >I can only assume that there is some fundamental misunderstanding >about Guix going on here. I don't think so. My guess is that you're using Guix too much as OS and too little as package manager in another OS. Nevermind, enough of this. It seems that noone is interested in that anyway. S_W --xjpwahnafg6rkpef Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXj6JuAAoJEEoj40+gM0NtSasP/29AfMhEG9UgSnkQZnuUsXxw uSHcss+SNFSR0rAMca8HsD5coJqACDM7VdsNhTUsjp5FkD+YYf2PjnYIg6mMAOFb ME6kydLfQwaoEhLWOrv30mD7jc63u0bAoHXk56BNOUdp8oONXJGwUB1kyK2p+DPh bR6D2MIAxAJU6yMfWrLuXZ1OgsUdC7Dt9JFHfDBuDoet7Z+rn2pzFfRYxHREKxJO vG8RGZKfYJnwptPSesFWyJhgLUzVP5T4C+HgXWNlEysy7eJRdNpEu7PMV9aMgmaI Jnpn/k8nVZUxCV4K4HbPIeEE1k1icAoUFS9rW8MoaE76bgIuD4mQrfpOr4cDUwy3 6GfAJz8gB9WeecaJgaQCKsuvJgL4krXYjSC5pVUz3LBPOu8t6DDOTYkg8NYMLnOs oR21FZKZnF5oRsKjoCLLjTB3XwtSuDSoHyfFiJnkRUqHQGd9iPBqciMtaTVB7cAM 3SxYpXE3ff/2zMFuHfWXBuqlzURPoEMH37060e2IPOFYKeHJaeewbXrLCMwC0tfg JmQgXKjQmp2kb9RryCrYGRbSwr2EcvdHgnVOJWykzvBENqwPCrLREi2Oo8jIdaYW vaPMrUg12daPt1g+UAdl5JBGixcdlhS+Fugh5Eqh9329UyB06vU6NedT4SuQA684 GeSp2rTWBcyHpiTnzVD0 =ivhS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xjpwahnafg6rkpef--