From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pjotr Prins Subject: Warning on using 'guix pull' Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 13:32:53 +0000 Message-ID: <20170209133253.GA23454@mail.thebird.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43681) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbotO-0001hh-Me for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:36:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbotK-0005Zl-Pz for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:36:10 -0500 Received: from mail.thebird.nl ([95.154.246.10]:36572) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbotK-0005ZJ-Ju for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:36:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Pjotr Prins Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org @FOSDEM we concluded that 'guix pull' does not necessarily work that wel. I added to my guix-notes the following: +Health warning: at this point 'guix pull' is considered a liability for two reasons + +1. You don't know what you get even if it is considered 'latest' +2. Guix pull runs over http and is not considered safe + --