From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Federico Beffa Subject: Re: Introducing =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBwYWNr4oCZ?= Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:48:17 +0100 Message-ID: <87zigdofxq.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> References: <87d1dodcnb.fsf@gnu.org> <87k27tv5sp.fsf@igalia.com> <87r320m0u5.fsf@gnu.org> <87efy0t0tv.fsf@igalia.com> <87a88n7pwq.fsf@gnu.org> <8737e9dwb9.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <8737e827vv.fsf@gnu.org> <878to0z7wk.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87fui8m3vz.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45106) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqbwO-0001kP-8l for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 04:48:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqbwN-0007l7-BS for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 04:48:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:48:53 +0100") 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: Andy Wingo Cc: guix-devel Andy Wingo writes: > On Mon 20 Mar 2017 15:14, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> Federico Beffa skribis: >> >>> If you provide an archive such as >>> 'guile-2.2.0-pack-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.lz' reachable from the main >>> project page (especially without any warning about its intended >>> purpose), I bet that many peoples will install it and keep it. If more >>> projects follow this example, we land to the above scenario where "rm >>> -rf /gnu" is not practical at all. > > Replying to Federico: These are the same considerations as with Guix > fwiw, unless you remove old profiles and "guix gc". There is a very big difference. The Guix binary installation pack does include the 'guix' command which allows you to remove stuff from the store. Any other pack not including 'guix' does not. Suppose that Guix pack bundles become popular and compare them to, say, Mac style archives. Let's go through Ludovic's analysis: 1. Composability: With Mac bundles you extract the archive in a directory. With Guix packs it's essentially the same. =20=20=20 i. Sharing of store items: What are the chances that two independent projects will generate packs from the same git checkout (or guix pull)? Pretty low. Therefore the amount of sharing between different packs will be pretty negligible. ii. Adding a program. Mac style: you just extract it. With Guix pack it's essentially the same, but it creates a manually unmanageable network of links which entangle all packs. iii. Remove an item: Mac style: delete a directory. With Guix pack the choice is: delete everything or keep everything. That is, you keep obsolete programs/libraries with security holes on your system ready for exploitation and unnecessarily filling your disk, or ... start from scratch. Is this composability? 2. Security: Mac style bundles are problematic, but at least you can easily delete old stuff and replace them with updated versions. Guix packs are worse: delete everything or keep it all. 3. Reproducibility: As long as you carefully take note from which git checkout you generate a Guix pack, Guix packs seems to be superior. Oh, don't you also depend on upsteam published archives of every single package in Guix? They sometimes disappear or are replaced in place with different archives and so, after some time, your carefully noted git checkout will not build anymore. 4. Experimentation: Guix is great for that, but packs? Are they useful for testing on other GNU/Linux systems? Maybe. But aren't all Guix packages built in isolated environments anyway? So, do you really need packs to test on other systems? Maybe, but probably not. Don't get me wrong, I find that Guix proper has many great features, but pack is not one of them.=20=20 I find very disturbing when peoples advertise things hiding half of the story to make them appear better than what they really are. Fede