From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jun 01 13:28:30 2020 Received: (at 41604) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Jun 2020 17:28:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36937 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfoEg-0002ZM-Cz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 13:28:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com ([209.85.215.196]:44616) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfoEe-0002Yx-PB for 41604@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 13:28:29 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id p30so3801983pgl.11 for <41604@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:28:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=asu-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=Wi/h/c8qwIArqnopJ7WIEbjscGOk/x8OPwmdWte+dIM=; b=eAPInP3R4jL0ZFEAYzCokk3to6ov/GhWhn/z9DWVOV5R8NEtrO52mSbopKJaX0cXRA 1DQK3jo8PG1hw+GOHg2vFfm/VLGRAp/VoQ2JfQL8R3N+c49H3c9eZzjcveGDlMHexjj7 oCY8SeZPWEz4qp0e2g6qK1t7yb9iKiTqdMYWHml74Yeg4puUA22EXuuV+HyzKuxF0hoq qW62/zrxXn0wQsK9FSeqoYPpHBBZQHrvGm4EHwOXZGt9W47GtOORArQ9fwZyplxd89kq e5yQGq/O8P4Jov3fu8yzICgPAX7nqNZ2HKF7+N8ZLgUqqISVDb8Rv9LrV2KYRatVUPbR N+YQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=Wi/h/c8qwIArqnopJ7WIEbjscGOk/x8OPwmdWte+dIM=; b=eYQlzo4C8sM/UndOUpxUmEVXsp90Gx+G68ijmJEDJhNB+nIIT/U6dG8ugZqtphRr8c bVcQsIyQ/0S+Rdl9sKSP+NaMvbM3v55i6Jyi1DLv0rhQE62+ktAJ15kvnJZfZZp/aVFI Vtj6em9oyQJrt2kywnuf8PiqxqJghSCfBnHWiD4XhZS3jKtMvFOIAh7n5AHbjy+84h0c 2ybAqhJGP8IDp7t0n366lmHZtA+voHiQhKo2Syik5pUmP/ty6SXKXZ3DPBdNc2xFv81m 943cpomsovSWoyX6dFwgRMCxkLvIxJZZLgAVGflGSuIbgiUsGqH99e68BqWqLmkUPv4k JQpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531rkplWukKgPmYTWipOK7dH8631x8AXnK/PJKM8zQEsF9CfljMP UONwf+F2QMg+MhUP8os7EvhIqw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzptoCbSmb3LDrTQrJgh2jb1oskMg2xfH82onvsoo1FZmuh+QnPCexjIJl7SC9vzeWebBaxcw== X-Received: by 2002:a62:248:: with SMTP id 69mr21855416pfc.243.1591032502821; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ecenter ([2600:1700:83b0:8bd0::7bb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r31sm80927pjg.2.2020.06.01.10.28.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:28:22 -0700 (PDT) From: John Soo To: zimoun Subject: Re: bug#41604: guix pull impossible after rebasing a local repository References: <87tuzxgzw2.fsf@web.de> <1D37F750-2DA3-4DF1-91A5-92637E58E753@asu.edu> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:28:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: (zimoun's message of "Mon, 1 Jun 2020 18:48:30 +0200") Message-ID: <87wo4q1yru.fsf@asu.edu> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 41604 Cc: Arne Babenhauserheide , bug-guix@gnu.org, 41604@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: -1.0 (-) Hello again, zimoun writes: > On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 07:04, John Soo wrote: > >> My problem largely comes from the fact that I specified a branch in >> channels.scm for over a year with the same workflow. If a branch can >> be specified for a channel repo then the system probably should >> handle the current pull commit not being available in the history. > > What do you mean? Well if a channel specification has a branch then the channel specification explicitly allows the commit history to not always have the commit from "guix describe". For example, say the channels.scm file has the following: (list (channel (name 'example-channel) (url "https://git.example.com/repo") (branch "example-branch")) ...) the maintainer of example-channel may rebase example-branch on some other branch. Then guix-pull will indeed be impossible for anyone who has example-channel specified with the branch field in channels.scm. So what I am saying is that if unrelated histories are to be disallowed during "guix pull" then branches should not be allowed in channel specifications. >> The commit history authentication is nice but seems to have >> regressed this particular use case. > > I am not sure that the new history authentication is the issue here. > IMHO, it is just the feature that shows up the flaw with your > workflow. ;-) You are right, I should not assume what introduced my problem. What I do know is that this workflow worked for the last year or more until last week. I should do a bisect to find the exact commit. >>From my understanding, Guix is built around content-addressed > principles (channel, store, etc.) so try to change on the fly the > address of such content would lead to break one way or another, IMHO. > > > Well, is the issue fixed for you now? The issue is not fixed and I think I found another problem with the workaround. To reiterate, my workaround is to "guix pull --roll-back" until a generation that has a the commit that is in my history then "guix pull" again to get my new work. The problem is the next "guix pull" shows all news from the old commit until the newest commit. In other words I get the news I saw from the previous time I pulled plus any new work. In this way the news continues to accumulate making the news less and less useful and more and more noisy. Btw, I am totally with you on pijul/darcs or some patch theory version control. Pijul does indeed look pretty promising. I packaged it in my channel if you want to try it :). Kindly, John