Re: Conda environments and reproducibility

["Lestang, Thibault" <t.lestang@imperial.ac.uk>]

Ludovic Courtès <ludovic.courtes@inria.fr> writes:

> Any findings so far?  Looking at the pipelines, it seems to be all
> green, right?

Timely reply - all green until 3 days ago when the job timed out after 70min. 
However, I re-ran the job manually this morning and it succeeded within a couple of minutes. Not 
quite sure what happened but probably not related to conda. Not logs available unfortunately.

If the process of reproducing the environment is going to fail at some point, I 
wonder if we could accelerate this process by defining a more complex environment. 
Any ideas?

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> 1. also use the image continuumio/miniconda3:latest
> 2. install Miniconda on the top of the Docker image of Debian
>   unstable and run "apt update && apt upgrade"
> 
> And I expect that #2 will break first, then #1 and last the current
> one.

Could you elaborate on this? For context the current pipeline 
pulls a pinned miniconda image then updates conda (=conda update conda=).  
Do you expect system libraries (I mean software installed through apt, not 
managed by conda) to influence the conda environment creation?  My current 
understanding is that conda brings its  own copies of these libraries without relying 
on whatever was/will be installed through other ways (e.g. apt).

Anyways very happy to set these two cases up as well.

Thibault