From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS
	id +KGxNlyVlWExEAAAgWs5BA
	(envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>)
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:50:52 +0100
Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by mp0 with LMTPS
	id SJNvMlyVlWHvBwAA1q6Kng
	(envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>)
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 23:50:52 +0000
Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87E67349A5
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:50:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:41746 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1mnUhX-0004bo-Ml
	for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:50:51 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38718)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <vagrant@debian.org>)
 id 1mnUgn-0004b6-12
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:50:05 -0500
Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([173.255.214.101]:60628)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <vagrant@debian.org>)
 id 1mnUgj-0003zw-Vv; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:50:04 -0500
Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:21:21:0:100e])
 (Authenticated sender: vagrant@cascadia.debian.net)
 by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC9111AA41;
 Wed, 17 Nov 2021 15:49:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: default tar format for "make dist" and patch file length
In-Reply-To: <87fsru8l05.fsf@ponder>
References: <87sfvxhrav.fsf@ponder> <874k8bxbit.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87fsru8l05.fsf@ponder>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 15:49:49 -0800
Message-ID: <87czmy8hr6.fsf@ponder>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Received-SPF: none client-ip=173.255.214.101; envelope-from=vagrant@debian.org;
 helo=cascadia.aikidev.net
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_bar: -
X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
 SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
 <guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>
X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN
X-Migadu-Country: US
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org;
	s=key1; t=1637193052;
	h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:
	 message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:
	 content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:
	 references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:
	 list-subscribe:list-post; bh=wpPcn5mD18dWwsniLLh5q8binwZToBy1RrHF4Jmv2mY=;
	b=CmAI+jC8PJ95CTlYxYGwCQ512vh3VSJDODegAnnFjMXRzOP3iLo7UhonWbItcm/Qir1j8j
	/pgzyWua0xDPuP6m/Fmjc4DSKhjcozlM2IL7qZPXs3j6s/1yifyHrOhO+ZwGKSkFCCB/C7
	E6s81pPOJeF8xK+OBVcGL9PjVb8j68Dg2bRv2IrmluGWsTnkzpzHBdiezmUhLS/t2NyX61
	8T0DrzX/Xu7ymAPfiQ0G5keGn4TqeqOJdZert8dY091LQ/yrRXH4SJP875NQNSvfXMw+T9
	J1wnaB3wiZggYqvqUeGDjTSGK9pwQhXhqdqc5fLqEDS7k6xzZG2CwuyjePxQpA==
ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1637193052; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none;
	b=UQgAT9715SnwREf0Ols4R/9NZwbgFRA48Ef4bm3aDqB58CONJOrQr3DJdC7eQlS3SJD4Lx
	JNLnes8J3ofWWZaMoarR/mZ65hV1+jfUYBINTnl9aHYX1eufSCgKNAjmjYEOfBsvzdO/uf
	V3ld7fWDowGsApDo/n2PS3GYCXESem6nxw41q/KjjGSpKYeIjrfx68ygAoBGzzyOnVjh7U
	0k3g50lzHva9YgAIgN6fwLoToBjGqSCuZfmBBTjupYf6HI7+Zu3G8qFZEgQzC1QWdgHHwm
	yAXokAj7Fu/6MP0lQERAojIBZVgUnL6Fzott3P0sJmqy/13dgj8c5o9oWud7Gg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1;
	aspmx1.migadu.com;
	dkim=none;
	spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"
X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.46
Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com;
	dkim=none;
	spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"
X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 87E67349A5
X-Spam-Score: -4.46
X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com
X-TUID: QHlX2bTuHbGP

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2021-11-17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2021-11-17, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>> Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> skribis:
>>
>>> Ideally, "guix lint" would be run and issues fixed before applying
>>> patches ... !
...
>>> Is it worth adding an inexpensive check to etc/git/pre-push that also
>>> checks for file-length and fails to push due to this issue potentially
>>> breaking "make dist"?
...
> This basically mimics the check that guix-lint does:
>
> for p in $(find gnu/packages/patches -type f ) ; do
>   if [ "$(echo guix-2.0.0rc3-10000-1234567890/${p} | wc -c)" -ge "99" ]
>   then
>     echo $p
>     exit 1
>   fi
> done
>
> Would something like that be cheap enough to consider adding to
> etc/git/pre-push? Are "find" and "wc" reasonable dependencies to assume
> they are available?
>
> Obviously, have to wait until they are all fixed, some of which probably
> require going through core-updates... or start with a more conservative
> but still useful length-check.

Another strategy would be to reduce the overly cautious lint check:

diff --git a/guix/lint.scm b/guix/lint.scm
index ac2e7b3841..e795c466b1 100644
=2D-- a/guix/lint.scm
+++ b/guix/lint.scm
@@ -957,7 +957,7 @@ (define (starts-with-package-name? file-name)

      ;; Check whether we're reaching tar's maximum file name length.
      (let ((prefix (string-length (%distro-directory)))
=2D           (margin (string-length "guix-2.0.0rc3-10000-1234567890/"))
+           (margin (string-length "guix-2.0.0rc3-10000-12345678/"))
            (max    99))
        (filter-map (match-lambda
                      ((? string? patch)


That leaves only two packages on master in violation of the lint check,
and those are both updatable directly on master, and "make dist" still
works with those two packages as they are, in my experience.

I think that's fairly safe to do, actually, as "make dist" on
core-updates-frozen currently produces a tarball prefixed with:

  guix-1.3.0.10380-fe257/

If guix keeps bumping it's version into the double-digits, an
rc-version, and it surpasses 99999 commits, and an extra character for
the git commit hash, this still leaves considerable wiggle-room:

  guix-10.0.0rc0-123456-abcde0/
vs.
  guix-2.0.0rc3-10000-12345678/

So, I guess I'm leaning towards making the guix lint check a little more
lenient.

Thoughts?


live well,
  vagrant

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCYZWVIgAKCRDcUY/If5cW
qsmbAQD1TMpvBBA6WXjxgPef41MHzaQIRqcUk+noPoupCsuoLAD/WGFmGdoR+LZA
pTDJD4k3Q243SRUgNapar7M2mClcbw8=
=wV9n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--