Re: Preservation of Guix (PoG) report 2023-03-13

["Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>]

Hi Timothy,

Timothy Sample <samplet@ngyro.com> skribis:

> Allow me to present to you a long-overdue update to the Preservation of
> Guix (PoG) report: <https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2023-03-13/>.  🎉

Yay, thank you!!

Do you think this could be turned into a Guix System service, with an
eye towards making it run on project infrastructure?

> Over the whole set, 77.1% are known to be safely tucked away in the
> Software Heritage archive.  But it’s actually much better than that.  If
> we only look at the most recent sampled commit (from Sunday the 5th),
> that number becomes 87.4%, which is starting to look pretty good!

Truly impressive!

> I have a few more notes on the report, but I want to put this near the
> top of the message so that people will see it.  :)  I wrote a script
> (see attached) that uses the PoG database to find missing sources on a
> packge-by-package basis.  That is, you can run
>
>     guix repl specification-to-swhids.scm pog.db bash

Neat!

>     • Subversion support (for TeX-based documentation stuff, I guess)
>     • bzip2 support for Disarchive (there are 45 bzip2 tarballs)
>     • ZIP support for Disarchive (for the 8 ZIP files)
>     • lzip support for Disarchive (or a workaround for ed)
>     • Fix some issues (gettext is .tar.gz, but something went wrong)
>     • Do something with the static bootstrap binaries

Subversion support should probably be high-priority because TeX Live is
deep down in the dependency graph so if we ever lose it, we’re doomed.

Thanks for the update!

Ludo’.