From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59652) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ihF7n-0007KF-TG for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 10:51:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihF7m-0003QC-Ie for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 10:51:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36257) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihF7m-0003Q1-GM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 10:51:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ihF7m-0006Ub-G9 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 10:51:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#38649] [PATCH] Parallelize `guix package` Resent-Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 16:50:30 +0100 In-Reply-To: <3d0ca2a8b59dd99e15b55033bc89b2e21aa49814.camel@student.tugraz.at> References: <87tv5zrpjp.fsf@gnu.org> <3d0ca2a8b59dd99e15b55033bc89b2e21aa49814.camel@student.tugraz.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Julien Lepiller Message-ID: <09CEFC5C-85EB-4B43-BADD-C4D1920E656A@lepiller.eu> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: 38649@debbugs.gnu.org, leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at, ludo@gnu.org Cc: roptat@lepiller.eu Le 17 d=C3=A9cembre 2019 16:19:34 GMT+01:00, Leo Prikler a =C3=A9crit : > >Of course, any operation can also fail midway due to some step not >succeeding=2E In that case it would be as if one had issued the other >command right after that, which may perhaps not be what one wanted to >do (assuming I install package A, and some guide suggests to also build >related, but not dependency-connected package B, so I end up installing >B without A)=2E However, such cases can easily be fixed by either >installing a fixed version of A later, using B on its own if it can be, >or rolling back=2E > >Of course, both solutions are flawed in the way that they assume user >intent either way=2E Perhaps a better one would be to let the user >specify whether they want to wait or not through a command line >parameter, using the current behaviour as the default approach=2E > >WDYT? I might be missing something=2E Guix install etc act on a "hidden" descrip= cion of the profile=2E Tgey take the current profile, modify it as specifie= d (adding a package, renovinh another or upgrading some)=2E When you run tw= o guix package in parallel, they both work on the same profile, which creat= es unexpected results=2E The expectation behind tge lock is that users will cancel tge ocher comman= d and fix it before re-running it (e=2Eg=2E instead of guix install foo & g= uix install bar, run guix install foo bar)=2E > >Regards, >Leo