From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
To: help-guix <help-guix@gnu.org>, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: guix time-machine, broken hash in an old package definition, a workaround?
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:29:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ3Bp2CSdEo4=yZip4jXhQm-5JvpV8rD23Sw8CavAboJXw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210122113606.iogodbik5prg5xhm@wzguix>
Hi,
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 12:36, Wiktor Żelazny <wz@freeshell.de> wrote:
> Would be cool, however for MRAN you also need the snapshot date. Would
> it be feasible to extract it from the commit date? There are dates at
Extract date from ~/.cache/guix/checkouts/pj... and author date of the
commit provided at the time-machine should the good one to provide to
MRAN.
> CRAN, but for the archived package versions these are “Last modified”.
> There is also “Date/Publication:” field in the tarball, but you wouldn’t
> trust a tarball with a hash mismatch.
About trust and mismatch, I would say: it depends. You can still
download the new 'r-foreign@0.85' served by CRAN with the mismatch and
audit by hand. Well, that's another story.
> I cannot check it. This approach works, but for some mysterious reason
> it also works when I remove the r-foreign-fixed definition and constrain
> the manifest to r. Without the definition, I would expect guix to try
> building r-foreign from CRAN. I thought that maybe guix treated
> r-foreign@0.8-75 and r-foreign@0.8-75-fixed as exchangeable because of
> the same hash, even if the versions and URIs differed, and so did not
> try to build r-foreign@0.8-75, but used r-foreign@0.8-75-fixed from the
> store. However, with `guix time-machine … -- build r-foreign@0.8-75`,
> I’m getting a different output than for `guix time-machine … -- build
> r-foreign@0.8-75-fixed`. I tried `guix gc <path to r>` to force the
> rebuild, but I got the “still alive” error, even though I had exited the
> environment.
To rebuild, the easiest is the option "build --check".
> I will just trust your expertise on that, and keep your solution. I can
> always go back to the inferior if it turns out to fail when I encounter
> the hash mismatch problem sometime in the future.
As I see it, there are 2 options:
_ option 1: write the package definition with the new MRAN source (or
with the CRAN source but with the new checksum hash), and a manifest
file. Then run
$ guix time-machine --commit=d81fb2a \
-- environment -m manifest.scm
The trick here is to use "--with-input"; somehow the graph has to be
rewritten. At the manifest level, it is something with
"transform-package-inputs"
_ option 2: use another package transformation:
"transformation-package-sources". The new API is simpler with
"package-with-source", so the manifest could contain...
(packages->manifest
(cons
(package-with-source r-foreign
"https://cran.microsoft.com/snapshot/2020-01-27/")
(map specification->package
(list "r"
"r-another-package"))))
...But the issue is that "package-with-source" was not so simple at
commit d81fb2a time. And the way is "transformation-package-sources"
even if I am not convinced it is simpler than create by hand the
correct 'r-foreign' package with option 1.
> Have a nice weekend,
Have a nice week-end too! :-)
All the best,
simon
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-22 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-13 13:22 guix time-machine, broken hash in an old package definition, a workaround? Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-13 16:24 ` zimoun
2021-01-13 19:28 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-13 18:57 ` Leo Famulari
2021-01-13 19:37 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-13 20:44 ` Leo Famulari
2021-01-14 8:30 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-14 9:48 ` zimoun
2021-01-14 19:00 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-14 20:29 ` zimoun
2021-01-15 20:18 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-15 20:48 ` zimoun
2021-01-18 8:57 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-18 9:11 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-20 9:35 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-20 10:15 ` zimoun
2021-01-20 12:26 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-20 15:03 ` zimoun
2021-01-22 11:36 ` Wiktor Żelazny
2021-01-22 16:29 ` zimoun [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJ3okZ3Bp2CSdEo4=yZip4jXhQm-5JvpV8rD23Sw8CavAboJXw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
--cc=help-guix@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).