[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16 |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:28:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Timothy Sample <samplet@ngyro.com> skribis:
> I’ve published a new preservation of Guix report:
>
> https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/latest/
>
> Actually, the URL is <https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2022-01-16/>, but I
> thought having a way to reference the latest report would be helpful.
Nice!
[...]
> A really important thing to do at this point is to verify that some
> reasonable looking computation is covered by what we are doing already.
> For instance, is every source used to build Guile (or Python or R)
> preserved? This will ensure that key sources are not missing, which is
> a real possibility given that everything so far has been purely a
> numbers game!
I wonder if we could have something similar to ‘guix weather -c’, which
would highlight missing sources with many dependents.
TeX Live is a big concern: it’s all Subversion, and everything depends
on those packages. IIRC, SWH does not support Subversion yet; and when
it does, we’ll have to adjust our code so it can actually fetch
Subversion checkouts from SWH. One issue is partial checkouts: all
these ‘texlive-’ packages refer to partial checkouts of the big TeX Live
repo.
Thoughts?
Ludo’.