* core-updates invites to an ungrafting party
@ 2023-10-08 15:12 Maxim Cournoyer
2023-10-09 1:41 ` John Kehayias
2023-10-11 9:44 ` Simon Tournier
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Maxim Cournoyer @ 2023-10-08 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guix-devel
Hello Guix!
The core-updates branch is still alive, and has accumulated (or plans
to) a few changes that cause world-rebuilds, such as fixes to
git-minimal (bug#65924) as well as docbook improvements (bug#65479) and
fixes to the build systems so that deep input rewriting works as
intended (bug#65665).
I think we could also batch ungrafting of all grafted packages, to make
the most out of this complete rebuild.
To recall, the policy surrounding what goes to core-updates is still
unchanged (per the Contributing section of our manual), except for areas
covered by teams (which is still patchy at best -- have you considered
joining teams?)
What do you think? If you are interested in participating in the
effort, you can send your ungrafting patches for review with the
--subject-prefix='PATCH core-updates' prefix or if you are a committer
you could simple version bumps to core tools that have been posted to
guix-patches, if any.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: core-updates invites to an ungrafting party
2023-10-08 15:12 core-updates invites to an ungrafting party Maxim Cournoyer
@ 2023-10-09 1:41 ` John Kehayias
2023-10-09 19:21 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-10-11 9:44 ` Simon Tournier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: John Kehayias @ 2023-10-09 1:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maxim Cournoyer; +Cc: guix-devel
Hi Maxim et al,
On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 11:12 AM, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Hello Guix!
>
> The core-updates branch is still alive, and has accumulated (or plans
> to) a few changes that cause world-rebuilds, such as fixes to
> git-minimal (bug#65924) as well as docbook improvements (bug#65479) and
> fixes to the build systems so that deep input rewriting works as
> intended (bug#65665).
>
> I think we could also batch ungrafting of all grafted packages, to make
> the most out of this complete rebuild.
>
That sounds good, we have suddenly got a bunch of grafts deep in the
dependency tree.
Speaking of which, I was planning to at least ungraft libx11 and
libxpm, recipients of recent grafts for security reasons, on a
forthcoming mesa-updates branch. I'm just waiting for the next point
release of mesa, since 23.2.1 is actually the first release where
typically a first .1 release is considered the start of the stable
series. (Though 23.2 has had a long release candidate time.)
So, what are we thinking of the time to build/merge core-updates? I
was hoping to do some ungrafting and updating in the mesa-related
ecosystem this week, depending on upstream.
I'll start a separate thread soon to ask for what patches to include
there that I don't already know about, but I'm happy to include
similar scope ungrafting if that makes sense before core-updates.
What does everyone think? I think it is more a question of
timing/resources, either doing some ungrafting earlier but then having
more builds again soon after (e.g. glibc ungraft), or knocking some of
it out earlier with a smaller scope.
> To recall, the policy surrounding what goes to core-updates is still
> unchanged (per the Contributing section of our manual), except for areas
> covered by teams (which is still patchy at best -- have you considered
> joining teams?)
>
And thanks for pointing this out. I do hope we continue building teams
and scopes for them so core-updates doesn't end up getting too
unwieldy. I'm optimistic of a quicker merge timeline here as well, the
ungrafting being a nice immediate reason to do this.
> What do you think? If you are interested in participating in the
> effort, you can send your ungrafting patches for review with the
> --subject-prefix='PATCH core-updates' prefix or if you are a committer
> you could simple version bumps to core tools that have been posted to
> guix-patches, if any.
Thanks Maxim for getting things rolling here!
John
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: core-updates invites to an ungrafting party
2023-10-09 1:41 ` John Kehayias
@ 2023-10-09 19:21 ` Maxim Cournoyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Maxim Cournoyer @ 2023-10-09 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Kehayias; +Cc: guix-devel
Hi John,
John Kehayias <john.kehayias@protonmail.com> writes:
> Hi Maxim et al,
>
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 11:12 AM, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>
>> Hello Guix!
>>
>> The core-updates branch is still alive, and has accumulated (or plans
>> to) a few changes that cause world-rebuilds, such as fixes to
>> git-minimal (bug#65924) as well as docbook improvements (bug#65479) and
>> fixes to the build systems so that deep input rewriting works as
>> intended (bug#65665).
>>
>> I think we could also batch ungrafting of all grafted packages, to make
>> the most out of this complete rebuild.
>>
>
> That sounds good, we have suddenly got a bunch of grafts deep in the
> dependency tree.
>
> Speaking of which, I was planning to at least ungraft libx11 and
> libxpm, recipients of recent grafts for security reasons, on a
> forthcoming mesa-updates branch. I'm just waiting for the next point
> release of mesa, since 23.2.1 is actually the first release where
> typically a first .1 release is considered the start of the stable
> series. (Though 23.2 has had a long release candidate time.)
>
> So, what are we thinking of the time to build/merge core-updates? I
> was hoping to do some ungrafting and updating in the mesa-related
> ecosystem this week, depending on upstream.
I should be able to drive this merge in a speedy manner, since I have a
lot of time at the moment. I'm hopeful it could be merged into master
in a month time (so, approximately mid-November).
> I'll start a separate thread soon to ask for what patches to include
> there that I don't already know about, but I'm happy to include
> similar scope ungrafting if that makes sense before core-updates.
To keep things easy to follow and avoid duplicating efforts, I'd keep
most ungrafting to core-updates, unless those pertaining to other teams
such as mesa.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: core-updates invites to an ungrafting party
2023-10-08 15:12 core-updates invites to an ungrafting party Maxim Cournoyer
2023-10-09 1:41 ` John Kehayias
@ 2023-10-11 9:44 ` Simon Tournier
2023-10-11 15:02 ` Maxim Cournoyer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Simon Tournier @ 2023-10-11 9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maxim Cournoyer, guix-devel
Hi,
On Sun, 08 Oct 2023 at 11:12, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> such as fixes to
> git-minimal (bug#65924)
Why not also update git-minimal/pinned?
Well, the idea with git-minimal/pinned (as well as with all /pinned
packages) is to have a variant that is barely updated – barely means a
core-updates round, I guess. :-) It avoids a world rebuild and allows to
update non-pinned variants more frequently.
Somehow, the update of git-minimal should not be a world rebuild. :-)
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix refresh -l -e '(@@ (gnu packages version-control) git-minimal)' | cut -f1 -d':'
Building the following 152 packages would ensure 370 dependent packages are rebuilt
$ guix refresh -l -e '(@@ (gnu packages version-control) git-minimal/pinned)' | cut -f1 -d':'
Building the following 2200 packages would ensure 5224 dependent packages are rebuilt
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Although, the change in bug#65924 also impacts git-minimal/pinned, hence
maybe the world rebuild you are talking about. :-)
Anyway. Update git-minimal/pinned too?
Cheers,
simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: core-updates invites to an ungrafting party
2023-10-11 9:44 ` Simon Tournier
@ 2023-10-11 15:02 ` Maxim Cournoyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Maxim Cournoyer @ 2023-10-11 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Tournier; +Cc: guix-devel
Hi,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 08 Oct 2023 at 11:12, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> such as fixes to
>> git-minimal (bug#65924)
>
> Why not also update git-minimal/pinned?
>
> Well, the idea with git-minimal/pinned (as well as with all /pinned
> packages) is to have a variant that is barely updated – barely means a
> core-updates round, I guess. :-) It avoids a world rebuild and allows to
> update non-pinned variants more frequently.
>
> Somehow, the update of git-minimal should not be a world rebuild. :-)
>
> $ guix refresh -l -e '(@@ (gnu packages version-control) git-minimal)' | cut -f1 -d':'
> Building the following 152 packages would ensure 370 dependent packages are rebuilt
>
> $ guix refresh -l -e '(@@ (gnu packages version-control) git-minimal/pinned)' | cut -f1 -d':'
> Building the following 2200 packages would ensure 5224 dependent packages are rebuilt
>
> Although, the change in bug#65924 also impacts git-minimal/pinned, hence
> maybe the world rebuild you are talking about. :-)
>
> Anyway. Update git-minimal/pinned too?
It's simply been overlooked. Would you mind sending a patch? :-)
--
Thanks,
Maxim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-10-11 15:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-10-08 15:12 core-updates invites to an ungrafting party Maxim Cournoyer
2023-10-09 1:41 ` John Kehayias
2023-10-09 19:21 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-10-11 9:44 ` Simon Tournier
2023-10-11 15:02 ` Maxim Cournoyer
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.