From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS
	id GMVjHg+FlWELCQEAgWs5BA
	(envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>)
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 23:41:19 +0100
Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	by mp0 with LMTPS
	id EMsZGg+FlWEhXQAA1q6Kng
	(envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>)
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 22:41:19 +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 6AC0832342
	for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 23:41:18 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:47614 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 1mnTcD-00041R-L5
	for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 17:41:17 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56324)
 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 1mnTat-00041J-9D
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 17:39:55 -0500
Received: from [2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c] (port=33656
 helo=cascadia.aikidev.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <vagrant@debian.org>) id 1mnTaq-0005vR-Oa
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 17:39:55 -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 1D5DE1AA41;
 Wed, 17 Nov 2021 14:39:50 -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: <874k8bxbit.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87sfvxhrav.fsf@ponder> <874k8bxbit.fsf@gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 14:39:38 -0800
Message-ID: <87fsru8l05.fsf@ponder>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for
 2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c (failed)
Received-SPF: none client-ip=2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c;
 envelope-from=vagrant@debian.org; helo=cascadia.aikidev.net
X-Spam_score_int: -10
X-Spam_score: -1.1
X-Spam_bar: -
X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793,
 SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=no 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=1637188878;
	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=BRYll6c/YzbdzFgD7m2Bc8WvzTrK+YuAudohg2BEtWU=;
	b=kggSARQxJads4ZsqPPA/0Ny56+gd70lMsH6dFmF2LxnP3SlhkKBVPNjCKJng37tT1XwUJ9
	oxTZi05NnyfVeENRppHzsbhbH/odXc3cMpaPJOpdrioFFouXMf4n+DQ9kkvEzRT68RoW6i
	zOxtoSHRPANtrE23AXbZIUNDB4/u04xmX2Wkf1Jmj7KG6a9jrdTQSAikm2RMMB/mKaCXgv
	+UXaY8CTshkR8aEv0ZpeYXMw2Cgih1tDVZLXX8L3Hb3g9Jn5oUwh9R76fGFnQ6cT0z58Cp
	d7n9lj4K1a7uWoT4RlhUEio22D5x3yodZUvMpsrlQ6F8Atv91mBOk9pNi+HjSA==
ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1637188878; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none;
	b=UCMxrbiKgjAtWrogbCH5jVJW4Ph1ZoH42yDk9D9B9R71l5RykY8YByluxZUA69P6NW5MQE
	8fM/xA2E/u0ZOobpw2N6zp3SAqf/s+ZU53lSQlgXmKOc1q3qysHu58iFUQO/bxE1y17NwF
	vKayYl1++qFZMvsBGP9usEpiBS+blEEYYJmB6oFRIF7DCP+dG/RCTzlMn8I/jX+PIwoTo7
	lBmJMeTjurCi1nfS6lSAKk/vTHnASRvNAAD/C8Kf9bnlIcb7auen/tCBPZ5pdv/Q86C1XP
	EfqAZzxhqxK1v4qiiMu+jyOI8OIARthNrQyYKU72N9XksfUg8Afnh/3FlcNbjg==
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: 6AC0832342
X-Spam-Score: -4.46
X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com
X-TUID: YIx2FhKGdI1Z

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

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 ... !
>
> On the bright side, that there=E2=80=99s just a dozen of issues on 20K pa=
ckages
> suggests it=E2=80=99s usually run.  :-)
>
> I think we=E2=80=99re used to running it for new packages but not when mo=
difying
> an existing package, which is probably when issues like that are
> introduced.

Sounds plausible.

My guess is this is triggered from folks using "git format-patch" and
dumping the files into gnu/packages/patches, which probably has a
default length that is a little too long in this case.

Another option that would help a little would be to drop the .patch
suffix, it's kind of redundant to have gnu/packages/patches/*.patch

>> 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"?
>
> Could be.

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.


>> A different angle might be to actually use a different tar format:
>>
>>   https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/Formats.html
>>
>> I would guess "make dist" is using the tar "v7" format, based on the 99
>> character length limit for files. Most of the other formats have no file
>> length limit or a longer limit.
>
> Yes, we could also do that.

Struggling to figure out how to do that; seems automake is very inclined
to use the old format... anyone with sufficient auto* skills to try and
upgrade the "make dist" to pass one of the newer --format=3D arguments to
tar?


live well,
  vagrant

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

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

iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCYZWEsQAKCRDcUY/If5cW
qoeCAQCyQqFnDBB1gLG04Nkzkw2EEvW48DujRBMtcpZb0M6p6QD+MHt8GXHxuF/7
mbaSsVncCAQmt3oIIuxmJCzUZ11IFgs=
=xX/W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--