From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: reproducibility
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:37:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bn8qa385.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKrPhPMn_gQMyRoa8b8ZV=o8rovfUPTbVNQnR=PraLWgXuYq3Q@mail.gmail.com> (Federico Beffa's message of "Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:11:47 +0100")
Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org> skribis:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org> skribis:
>>
>>> I've noticed that a derivation is a function of the order of the
>>> inputs. As an example, the following two input orders give rise to two
>>> distinct derivations:
>>>
>>> A)
>>>
>>> (inputs
>>> `(("texlive" ,texlive)
>>> ("texinfo" ,texinfo)
>>> ("m4" ,m4)
>>> ("libx11" ,libx11))
>>>
>>> B)
>>> (inputs
>>> `(("texinfo" ,texinfo)
>>> ("texlive" ,texlive)
>>> ("m4" ,m4)
>>> ("libx11" ,libx11))
>>>
>>> Is this intentional?
>>
>> Yes. There are several places where order matters, most importantly
>> search paths, and these are computed from the input lists.
>
> If order matters, it would probably be more robust to force internally
> a specific order rather than relying on the (often random) order
> defined in a package recipe (possibly created by an importer, ...).
Most of the time any order would work, but I can imagine situations
where the packager could purposefully choose a specific order. So I’d
rather not do any automatic sorting, if that’s what you have in mind.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-12 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-09 10:53 reproducibility Federico Beffa
2016-01-10 20:49 ` reproducibility Ludovic Courtès
2016-01-12 20:11 ` reproducibility Federico Beffa
2016-01-12 21:37 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2016-01-13 8:13 ` reproducibility Federico Beffa
2016-01-13 9:15 ` reproducibility Efraim Flashner
2016-01-13 19:51 ` reproducibility Federico Beffa
2016-01-13 13:56 ` reproducibility Ludovic Courtès
2016-01-13 19:53 ` reproducibility Federico Beffa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bn8qa385.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=beffa@ieee.org \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).