From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37244) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dJGQh-0001lh-QE for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:42:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dJGQc-0003zb-V2 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:42:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:33175) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dJGQc-0003zV-R2 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:42:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dJGQc-0004bZ-Hg for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:42:02 -0400 Subject: bug#27271: [PATCH 0/4] Catch collisions at profile creation time Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <20170607092242.20565-1-ludo@gnu.org> <878tl2djh8.fsf@elephly.net> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 11:41:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: <878tl2djh8.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Fri, 09 Jun 2017 03:42:59 +0200") Message-ID: <871sqtpkfo.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 27271@debbugs.gnu.org Heya, Ricardo Wurmus skribis: >> These patches allow us to catch problematic collisions when computing >> a profile derivation. As we know, the profile builder often spits out >> a number of warnings about collisions but that is not very useful because >> users cannot distinguish the problematic cases from the harmless cases >> (an example of a harmless case is when GDB and Binutils provide an >> almost-identical .info file twice). > > This is very good! Thanks for implementing it! > >> An open question is whether there are commonly used combinations of >> packages that trigger conflicts. I haven=E2=80=99t had any problems wit= h my >> profile (with 234 packages) nor with my GuixSD config, but I encourage >> you to test it on your profile! > > We often see this at the MDC because some people don=E2=80=99t use manife= sts and > I may have upgraded the shared Guix instance between invocations of > =E2=80=9Cguix package=E2=80=9D. This happens particularly often with num= py because > that=E2=80=99s propagated quite often. (I=E2=80=99d *love* to get rid of= propagated > inputs in Python! They are so annoying!) Perhaps we could modify =E2=80=98sys.path=E2=80=99 from the top of =E2=80= =98__init__.py=E2=80=99 file to get something similar to RUNPATH. I=E2=80=99m not sure if there are any downsides or gotchas. Thoughts? > I=E2=80=99ll give this a try soon and report my experience with it. Great, thanks for your feedback! Ludo=E2=80=99.