From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Guix binary tarball
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 12:19:47 +0200
Message-ID: <87y4kjczzw.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20150515164602.GA13539@debian> <87382smaoy.fsf@netris.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47945)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Yv1Kv-0004nO-7G
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 06:34:54 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Yv1Kq-0003UI-86
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 06:34:53 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37093)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1Yv16P-0006K4-Bi
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 06:19:53 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87382smaoy.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Tue, 19
	May 2015 19:03:57 -0400")
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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:

> Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:
>
>> - The tarball also contains /, /root and /var. When unpacking it, the ow=
ner
>>   and permissions are changed on the system. As a consequence, we could =
not
>>   ssh into the machine any more (!). Could these directories be left out=
 of
>>   the tarball and only their contents be kept in?
>
> The directories could indeed be left out.

Oh you mean the *parent* directories, right?  Sorry I hadn=E2=80=99t unders=
tood
that.

> I experimentally verified that GNU tar will still create those
> directories if they don't already exist, but will leave their
> ownership and permissions unmodified if they do exist.
>
> Here's a suggested patch:
>
> diff --git a/gnu/system/install.scm b/gnu/system/install.scm
> index 799851c..10fbfdd 100644
> --- a/gnu/system/install.scm
> +++ b/gnu/system/install.scm
> @@ -71,7 +71,14 @@ under /root/.guix-profile where GUIX is installed."
>            (with-directory-excursion %root
>              (zero? (system* "tar" "--xz" "--format=3Dgnu"
>                              "--owner=3Droot:0" "--group=3Droot:0"
> -                            "-cvf" #$output ".")))))
> +                            "-cvf" #$output
> +                            ;; Avoid adding /, /var, or /root to the tar=
ball,
> +                            ;; so that the ownership and permissions of =
those
> +                            ;; directories will not be overwritten when
> +                            ;; extracting the archive.
> +                            "./root/.guix-profile"
> +                            "./var/guix"
> +                            "./gnu")))))
>=20=20
>      (gexp->derivation "guix-tarball.tar.xz" build
>                        #:references-graphs `(("profile" ,profile))
>
> If we did this, then we could revert 8c3a5d7059 and avoid any use of
> --skip-old-files.  I would be in favor of this.
>
> What do you think?

Yes, that=E2=80=99s even better, please commit and revert 8c3a5d7059.

Thanks!

Ludo=E2=80=99.