From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marius Bakke Subject: Re: 03/09: gnu: util-linux: Update to 2.30.1. Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 21:17:29 +0200 Message-ID: <87mv6ajmt2.fsf@fastmail.com> References: <20170902135826.20582.25978@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20170902135830.43E0F2044A@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87pob8x23p.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37910) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dowsL-0003N1-Tu for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2017 15:17:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dowsG-00056k-UO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2017 15:17:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87pob8x23p.fsf@gnu.org> 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: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hello! > > mbakke@fastmail.com (Marius Bakke) skribis: > >> mbakke pushed a commit to branch staging >> in repository guix. >> >> commit 66d4cd7978d41cfde5047f281dc17693bbd4610e >> Author: Marius Bakke >> Date: Sat Jul 29 18:34:15 2017 +0200 >> >> gnu: util-linux: Update to 2.30.1. >>=20=20=20=20=20 >> * gnu/packages/linux.scm (util-linux): Update to 2.30.1. > > util-linux has ~2,100 dependents, so per the guidelines in the manual > (info "(guix) Submitting Patches"), we should perhaps push it to > =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99 instead? I have kind of mentally adjusted the 1200 limit to ~1800 to account for the amount of new packages since that was written. :-) 1800 would let us update things like dbus, glib and pango, where most of util-linux' 2100 dependents come from, which is why I "threw it in there". But I guess our build farm has not scaled in accordion with the package count. Since we're now doing shorter core-updates cycles, I suppose these updates can wait. However, reverting these commits: de02edbf11ffab652cc9def611358eefbc860147 gnu: cairo: Update to 1.14.10.=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 1bb0545bb8bcf3a60efa940ef2442763d8abe975 gnu: glib: Update to 2.52.3.=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20 d2ee294c0400ac8f2a10f10c3c9644da513a3712 gnu: pango: Update to 1.40.11.=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20 a4a3d93290e8ad35f6e7526e78878d2d3397bb27 gnu: harfbuzz: Update to 1.5.0.=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20 66d4cd7978d41cfde5047f281dc17693bbd4610e gnu: util-linux: Update to 2.30.1.= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 9238a9c086cc4ebac078080c1e7201c570660031 gnu: dbus: Update to 1.10.22. ...brings the 'staging' rebuild count down to ~1640 according to `guix refresh -l libva mesa libdrm bluez cunit wayland graphviz librsvg gtk+`, even though they individually don't touch more than ~1k packages. Adding 'dbus' gives 1988 and 'util-linux' 2171, so it's not a huge difference. Is it still worth dropping the 300-500 extra rebuilds? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAlmtpskACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPrviggAmYkwjNbR7AuRAyxVD9gcs4OdunAOg39yFd9oSRo1KgMMyU2zMPqduO58 br02D5A186jgJYHTpvBP3MHVu1S0cZOaIYuKvr6mdElRGb2/qlQSTaP4OygBUqzP 1SAX5RnOefSxVnc52/Ywa7B67MZ99LQ80Re8w3qazdbO8oiqiCwnIREob7W7EjFj pKsUIpErSNIAHcDTirLoXsPE0Sxl0hsvE5tI50TFpRbqPpgsvg/dGsy+tdknQ40w myouT/7MHeY3jrK8+oMMs5X+NTxGMU/jqTplhzfi5v5heoGa33sbCaB2AnjcyDwR HBhWKEKibtu1903rGmEtPyCR55lwNQ== =m41I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--