From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Sassmannshausen <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: Mention "guix pull" during installation.
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:41:24 +0100
Message-ID: <87oa08l61n.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <82b3233597949c866c26628054117ee3@mykolab.ch>
	<20161217173856.GA30440@jasmine> <87inqho626.fsf@gnu.org>
Reply-To: alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45455)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com>) id 1cIsZg-0006I5-Ig
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 02:41:33 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com>) id 1cIsZd-0001Xp-Eg
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 02:41:32 -0500
In-reply-to: <87inqho626.fsf@gnu.org>
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: <http://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>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Petter <petter@mykolab.ch>


Ludovic Courtès writes:

> Hello!
>
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
>
>> I've recently gave an explanation of why I think using `guix pull`
>> before installing GuixSD should not be recommended unconditionally:
>>
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/2016-11/msg00047.html
>>
>> In the specific case of installing GuixSD 0.11.0 today, `guix pull` is
>> necessary, because we lack the substitutes, and some packages can't be
>> built at all now [1]. But, adding these lines to the manual now won't
>> make it show up in the 0.11.0 installer manual.
>>
>> I think we should work on improving our infrastructure in the next
>> release cycle, and revisit this change to the manual if we are still
>> having problems before the 0.13.0 release.
>>
>> What does everyone think?
>
> I agree with everything you wrote here.
>
> Ludo’.

I think I too agree here.  Especially as my experience (running GuixSD
on i686 bare metal) suggests that `guix pull` can actually result in
packages that do not quite build reliably.  There currently seems to be
a `guix pull` sweet spot when the substitutes are not too old yet the
recipes not too new…

I think the best solution would definitely be guaranteed availability of
substitutes for releases until at least the next release — so I greatly
appreciate the work that is being done to on the infrastructure side.

My 2¢,

Alex