From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id EAYICt35WWCmDwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:23:25 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id KILhBd35WWDzIAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:23:25 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0C7525A00 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:23:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:57584 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOhwJ-0002kQ-PH for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 10:23:23 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44844) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOhvl-0002JK-8p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 10:22:49 -0400 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:49474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOhvh-0004aI-W4 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 10:22:47 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2798E237; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:22:42 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2MeYBVt0ChLY; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:22:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (p200300dd5710fa000ebdbf2b9ab0da05.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:dd:5710:fa00:ebd:bf2b:9ab0:da05]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA4233B; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:22:40 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:22:39 +0100 From: Andreas Enge To: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: imagemagick@6.9.11-48 to graft or not to graft with 6.9.12-2 Message-ID: References: <87v99iki3l.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87v99iki3l.fsf@netris.org> X-Spamd-Bar: / X-Rspamd-Server: hera X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 2798E237 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.50 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS(2.00)[mhw@netris.org ..,andreas.enge@aquilenet.fr ...]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%] Received-SPF: neutral client-ip=185.233.100.1; envelope-from=andreas@enge.fr; helo=hera.aquilenet.fr X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1616509404; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=udaVrCnfq5upGPSzOg6AmVsxUnI4ZsFEDRcyQUIWA/M=; b=OTV2XnHviwpGSukqJSEh/qD0egVyyLOgtOT9NeExuCQ5zHUjqfgCILauu2RTNFksiJzeDb C3x8PjW3jOldXOez3oKeAzygyUo5+OExy/hpgo9CaulYNHkch8rbp5WAzpeTFDQanXD2UC W/Wxag+K5ceVI18PTf9W2MwhnVZZSXa0p4R4hB6GgR7sdbJ18WHtEFzTsVgreTZpZt5sFE evdtC2BVkTU8sHWfEQhOzMuI96NGqU3FyA3Dc0B+Yam2JEWmXDkr8s+4a6nBGcJj++mdA9 lPCn2pp5/l48B/lg7Q9mJLRh8+PdSInjZci6JSNk1PZuVs/HnftBazL2z63wZw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1616509404; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Go1jT4zEZmbCcKlNTVkOcWt8FBUa439ZZCfCK+IS9D8c0m9K5M8EtOyfcPaGpC6mfcHhn+ HUpESoqcjL1Wf2aJBXcMdl3J8GUHEOcD8NUkww9CsM3FHUxf0Ez1zvXHE/a3xhrEVMFLlk wPKPHGn1OFGDtXQ9TFc8pIFUAYUmJk57/BVrQvGYyKRwHgDa72qTPspFkGAWnraepr5hkx jE3ombuXifzAgAJDFmWqki89/s8FFZJawPAO09zsyH64sZ84g3cfaHeDk6/9C1u8sOjbmW P5zRi1Bwgj5q2e0EkVW7o196LT9b1OfFa6qAaFUR+Clv9NPHWzb1FyQDfMnyDg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.48 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: A0C7525A00 X-Spam-Score: -2.48 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: yq07wjTeByYJ Hello Mark and Léo, Am Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 05:12:35PM -0400 schrieb Mark H Weaver: > However, I think it would be going too far to adopt your proposal as a > general rule for all grafts. In some cases, it can clearly be seen that > an upstream release includes little more than bug fixes. For example, > if the recent gvfs-1.40.2 security update had required grafting, I would > not have hesitated to do so, and that would have been much simpler and > IMO cleaner than importing the upstream patches into our tree. Am Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 02:34:52PM +0100 schrieb Léo Le Bouter: > In general my opinion is that backporting fixes is time-consuming and > that if we have to do it each time I wont be able to keep up with the > load. I'd rather update things to a version that already includes fixes > and is supported by upstream even at the cost of world rebuilds. I > can't deal with upstreams who either do not backport fixes, or don't > integrate fixes at all. these are very good arguments, which I understand and share. But moving to another version is problematic even when there is no soname bump, as I wrote in my bug report https://issues.guix.gnu.org/47315; grafts with different version numbers lead to a command line behaviour that is not understandable: $ guix package -A imagemagick imagemagick 6.9.12-2g out,doc gnu/packages/imagemagick.scm:132:2 imagemagick 6.9.11-48 out,doc gnu/packages/imagemagick.scm:48:2 $ guix build imagemagick@6.9.11 guix build: error: imagemagick: package not found for version 6.9.11 $ guix build imagemagick@6.9.11-48 /gnu/store/c30y49vg735g6b4hh590zrc9fmvcsy0w-imagemagick-6.9.12-2g-doc /gnu/store/l3hr0fimip6v7vmkgxbqygsglxaxasy0-imagemagick-6.9.12-2g >From a user's perspective, inkscape@6.9.11 is at the time there and not there; it is shown by "guix package", but then not accessible for install- ation, but silently "glossed over" in favour of a different version. I just noticed that I can do this: $ guix build imagemagick@6.9.11-48 --no-grafts /gnu/store/wlnciwhn6llwqwywf4hq739v5bbcrq3h-imagemagick-6.9.11-48-doc /gnu/store/vlix7fclb7ifjgmxgpwr1pvraff89w7b-imagemagick-6.9.11-48 But I can also do this: $ guix build imagemagick@6.9.12-2g --no-grafts /gnu/store/4s20df0zjmmys8zvlvynksrwz5xqk9ls-imagemagick-6.9.12-2g-doc /gnu/store/7iwx7rj1ipsbgb9wgimrrflniyxpilw3-imagemagick-6.9.12-2g where I do not know what I would have expected - the ungrafted version of 6.9.12 is 6.9.11, no? At the same time, for once it respects my wish for a specific version. Otherwise said, grafting to different versions breaks our semantic for designating packages, in which version numbers play an important role, and replaces it by a mess which even with the examples above I have a hard time understanding. Caeterum censeo: The real fix is probably to do less grafts and more rebuilds... Andreas