From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:51:18 -0500 Message-ID: <20170307195118.GA30247@jasmine> References: <20170223211156.GA24382@jasmine> <877f429kju.fsf@gnu.org> <20170306213434.GA25316@jasmine> <20170307063330.bhv2ugsvi3qeofu5@penguin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35422) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clL9R-000854-Qw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:52:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clL9O-0003GC-Pr for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:52:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:46828) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clL9O-0003G1-Md for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:52:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1clL9O-0003tW-GA for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:52:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170307063330.bhv2ugsvi3qeofu5@penguin> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=C4=8Cech?= Cc: 25852@debbugs.gnu.org --fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 07:33:30AM +0100, Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1 =C4=8Cech wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 04:34:34PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:12:21PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > > Leo Famulari skribis: > > >=20 > > > > In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after = guix > > > > pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant numbe= r of > > > > users who were still using the guix-daemon from 0.10.0. > > > > > > > > It seems unlikely that they have been updating all of root's > > > > packages except for the guix package. Rather, I bet they never upda= ted > > > > root's packages at all, for ~1 year. > >=20 > > They could have been stuck with an old daemon if they copied the systemd > > or upstart service files we provide. > >=20 > > That problem should be fixed by 613d0895b92c677e0639d5e77c55043e38e020c8 > > (build: Don't embed absolute paths in .service and .conf service > > files.). >=20 > That is right. But >=20 > 1) there was no release with this "fix" > 2) I (as distro package maintainer) didn't take this patch manually as > it is fragile and hacky. Have you considered fresh guix installation? This will take effect for the next release of Guix; it addresses a problem that arises when somebody installs the binary release of Guix. I'm not addressing downstream packages of Guix with this commit. --fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAli/DzIACgkQJkb6MLrK fwjDzQ/+NS703/99Z373izhdd0dculp7ntzcRf98SiOCYnyFmPqZRkXQ7jPcyAPj JSgpouXbZdLSsYzLn3BaJVHYifq7jwf6b7yvR/r9Y2W1PsKnHmkvAxbxhjM3Bh5r M5F4ZKWuame1k3faEp5xO1IDOpyMxPRIhXgXUc0RtWezVBQp4Zx3xfe+oyE13f75 xQVBgkFy+3TAz/COGAHuXjdfB/uwpEukCYc4ydTr+Fs/Xl5j9ev81OH8piVXE2j3 43ixqKoQPUe3Pcf6QzJ71iRQxAUXx0ag/nobTlksR8jyct6wE0IoKpOWnptKIJJw N7Wz216VZ3PvFMbASugEJ3LHjNmnQLGn0wFQC57sAq47mSM8r26jTOrrS85YFxJE oeveGqPVUbdQTFd+uxVRczcxtDmwVl6DqpKxca9J/PqkNVACSAofxCRZV/T7r7cu yK3uk5DuEaXpLVGAu0I+RsYsISXjIpdcAvAlZ1EqnzUjjIvNk8Zz5H/gxWPmxOnO 4xZ7fuVF7+pWuM03rwaUGrBkbSXQ1xItEc0kSOWPTtxtopeAtp4ZTgKcYxqf7qMA NmB0QZ9izge2kCcbfnFv/7m/3jf5aFLD/+X0QD0FdKmnn2goJfBKsDLyO+dlQJ6x 41Z+t1kMlA1lSr0lPDRTR7qLkFrfApLi5p19xADyaAxXGnd/uUc= =KPBY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N--