From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:1008:1e59::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms1.migadu.com with LMTPS id 0CbrE3JsXWZogAAAA41jLg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:10:42 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1.migadu.com with LMTPS id OPchDnJsXWZ9PwAA62LTzQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:10:42 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=igalia.com header.s=20170329 header.b=diQK9rml; dmarc=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" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1717398642; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=tt63ac9eImh0kagolQO2qZNjpBm93EVOIWJnl9UzeXw=; b=BkXbBp/VeJTb0ugBfJONU1Ywr4pg14AJYncoYSNN2+1WUubT0IArlrtqRHJ3f0ByRNu436 7MEqhhxD0+Q3hXVq+nTIrP+LmtV3yYxDmi8jKj2JRMyWLIyo1VJY5DFm/+zuDF5l65EwSr af/nmlSWOxNPkaN+4afoyKVYvKt1OUBU0gfU3EnUvzRt8NmWcbX5CZMbqnBRgRRhcO14nb FyccpOh6B9F0kxPmMhol0rRBIOl/6NrjNU73K630pdDMDvVO8mviHRkBZs3c/QoNZNWNeA DDg9TOcD7wdfeTb+cTEe3Tt5nIjVJ+gzi/R0tASXdAvND0+US/oQs3kJNlCQEg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1717398642; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=MFsrbxZjwbkBASIVQ1fMrdTwE3kuYbRoCSx4QW3Kd4STtWECHlX6jfr/mTXmQOz6NyWqSh 3K76EFkTTgTk+1AKQY2Rr/bQiE/nY8tkiilIgZIeY97wqwWVuAGN/hLyAVYG2/VIBjXE8/ O0YNSqSMlL4mNSkZpsuq5tlfBpV5eOAkil1GhxHlCD5yck6QQbK0i6WbtwvFmnaOoRpDRN R0QrAFE3bgfl7n+JiJT0NoN3+VGTbtXmMqWiSMMFaoY85kq+zhWl+PvxBMVcmDk4lK+gLx ObQ4f2cKCwpHiND5YYJAWa1nf0h/dzZ/mH9jSV6lwubTGHgR1hlsTQLg4+lfMg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=igalia.com header.s=20170329 header.b=diQK9rml; dmarc=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" 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 19619767B6 for ; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:10:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE1p2-0002MY-5P; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 03:09:36 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE1oz-0002M0-GD for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 03:09:33 -0400 Received: from fanzine.igalia.com ([178.60.130.6] helo=fanzine2.igalia.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE1ox-0001tZ-6K; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 03:09:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tt63ac9eImh0kagolQO2qZNjpBm93EVOIWJnl9UzeXw=; b=diQK9rml1AuSnGCg8FzHeBw836 RZoMD7N4DjAzphObchzaT5t//YcKeZFnsmClgGh/SqjgIbADimxu/eekNqz70oNxYObTCO93ahTIA DdfJGKJMUYVaZNIL1IQuFl8rbabKnaYtonQJ7ogJD5M5ODGFzHEkmMF7T/Ku8GW0Rr1gJ2LqDf9Ox pCLUQN/Nnc40BFwLNmBJj5r6GScd1dyuX+l1JOJGvGz/1uks6zsPSNfXQUr4vm7uIjjnOd+Ot4Tzt Ipk10mJSyjyguRGWPNHKLEbd5d5mVEaMjXR3TdO7SoYcpeqE61L0V6geuaNnkTHUO1VbfEpOYKjdB UP/MRz5w==; Received: from [37.67.75.195] (helo=beastie) by fanzine2.igalia.com with esmtpsa (Cipher TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim) id 1sE1oj-00GBzN-O7; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:09:17 +0200 From: Andy Wingo To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Ricardo Wurmus , guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: "guix pack -f docker" does too much work In-Reply-To: <87cyp0ojc5.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sat, 01 Jun 2024 15:58:50 +0200") References: <87sey0lqpn.fsf@elephly.net> <87cyp0ojc5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:09:17 +0200 Message-ID: <87frtuec4i.fsf@igalia.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.60.130.6; envelope-from=wingo@igalia.com; helo=fanzine2.igalia.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 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." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.34 X-Spam-Score: -2.34 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 19619767B6 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-TUID: Ff5EmQACqoSp On Sat 01 Jun 2024 15:58, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> I think it would be great if "guix pack -f docker" could avoid building >> all these identical layers again and again. Perhaps it would be >> possible to have a single derivation for each layer? This way we >> wouldn't have to recreate the same layer archives every time. > > That sounds nice in terms of saving CPU time. It=E2=80=99s less nice in = terms > of disk usage: a single =E2=80=98guix pack -f docker=E2=80=99 run would p= opulate the > store with roughly twice the size of the closure. If the concern is CPU time, I would make sure you have switched to zstd or some other faster codec, via `guix pack -f docker -C zstd`. You probably already knew but if you haven't tried, it's quite surprising :) Andy