From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: boost: Update to 1.61.0.
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 22:16:54 +0100
Message-ID: <8760pnzlbt.fsf@ike.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
References: <8737kw2tp8.fsf@gnu.org> <871t0g2o7m.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20160921161131.GA3358@solar> <20160921172733.GA7544@solar>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54187)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mbakke@fastmail.com>) id 1bnBMo-00016Z-JW
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:17:15 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mbakke@fastmail.com>) id 1bnBMj-0005xE-2r
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:17:13 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20160921172733.GA7544@solar>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>, Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 06:11:31PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> boost has quite a few dependencies, as Ricardo already pointed out, and in my
>> experience tends to be a bit fragile. So maybe the best option would be to
>> create a boost-update branch and have it built on hydra to see whether there
>> are problems. It not, one could then cherry-pick the commit to master.
>
> I replied before reading all the messages in that thread. Of course if Eric
> has tried the commit locally and tested that nothing breaks, this could be
> pushed to master directly.

Should this not be pushed to core-updates? `guix refresh -l` reports:

Building the following 190 packages would ensure 395 dependent packages
are rebuilt: [...]

That will take a while on Hydra, and in the mean time anyone trying to
install any dependent (or sub-dependent) package will have to compile
them locally.

Unless there is a security issue, isn't this exactly what core-updates
is for? Is `guix refresh recursive`? Many of the sub-depentents seem
like they have other dependents, affecting more than 10% of the tree.

~marius