From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 02 12:44:02 2020 Received: (at 39387) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Feb 2020 17:44:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40472 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iyJHt-0001oL-Qy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 12:44:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60070) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iyJHs-0001nu-9e for 39387@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 12:44:00 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:53582) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iyJHn-0003AT-44; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 12:43:55 -0500 Received: from [185.224.57.162] (port=41776 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iyJHm-00068A-7D; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 12:43:54 -0500 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxim Cournoyer Subject: Re: bug#39387: Builds are *not* offloaded when using the "--keep-failed" or -K option. References: <87o8uhr3gx.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2020 18:43:50 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o8uhr3gx.fsf@gmail.com> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Sat, 01 Feb 2020 23:57:18 -0500") Message-ID: <87y2tkzxyh.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39387 Cc: 39387@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Hi Maxim, Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > In the second case, the build is started on the local machine instead of > being dispatched to the offload machine. Presumably, this is done so > that the files are available locally; but I'd prefer if it'd offload and > keep the files on the remote. An alternative would be to copy the remote= build directory > locally after failure. Indeed, it=E2=80=99s a feature! :-) It was discussed here: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/38312 There we discussed the possibility of printing a warning, which wasn=E2=80= =99t implemented. I=E2=80=99m closing in the meantime, but let me know what you think! Thank you, Ludo=E2=80=99.