Re: Why "update substitutes?"

[Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1509 bytes --]

On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 05:07:21PM +0000, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> Hi Attila,
> 
> On 25 October 2024 23:42:32 UTC, Attila Lendvai <attila@lendvai.name> wrote:
> >i still don't really know what's happening there, but maybe something like "fetching the registry" or "fetching metadata" would be more descriptive of it?
> 
> Howsabout…  ‘looking for suitable substitutes on <server>’ if we must change the string?
> 
> It describes what's happening, implies why it's happening, and avoids clichéd jargon.  I wouldn't even know what ‘fetching the registry’ means.
> 
> >to me "the substitutes" means the binary artifacts.
> 
> Yes.

I think it comes from the assumption that if a substitute isn't
available then it's dependencies are (all) available. Thus we get stuck
in a recursion of looking further and further to try to find the base of
what is available and will allow us to build the derivation we're
actually looking for.

One option I've been mulling over would be to look for a substitute, and
if that failed to automatically look ALL the way back immediately. I
don't like it because I'm sure it's overkill and would probably add
strain on the substitute servers, but it would decrease the number of
times 'searching for substitutes' is printed.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]