Ludovic Courtès writes: > I think you didn’t answer this specific question; thoughts? I had a peek at your more recent email, and think you dug up (and commented on) my handling of it, but I'll link [1] just in case. > The number of ‘build-derivations’ calls is the same whether it’s local > or distant. > > What would make a difference is having a single script instead of > three—i.e., one program that does: > > #~(begin > (activate-system …) > (upgrade-services …) > (switch-system …)) > > I think this program could even be added to the ‘system’ > derivation—i.e., as a file next to those in /run/current-system. > > That way, switching to a system generation would be a matter of running > it’s ‘switch’ program. > > Perhaps this should be our horizon. WDYT? I'm a fan of that idea. Having it as a file means we would be able to run activation services on a roll-back. I've added this to my to-do list of patches :) Regards, Jakob [1]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2019-07/msg00656.html