IRC channel logs

<jmd>Is there an option to force a package to be rebuilt?

<dsfdds>jmd: could you describe the problem? why do you want to rebuild the package?

<jmd>dsfdds: Sorry. Which problem? Which package?

<dsfdds>jmd: I was referring to this message of yours: "Is there an option to force a package to be rebuilt?"

<jmd>Oh that.

<dsfdds>Why do you want that?

<jmd>Well during development of a package, it built "successfully" but I wasn't happy with the details.

<jmd>So I modified the definition a bit, and ran guix build.

<dsfdds>Didn't that trigger a rebuild?

<jmd>But of course, guix says this package is already built.

<dsfdds>I think this should have triggered a rebuild. I think you should report this on the list.

<dsfdds>jmd: I had similar issues in the past, but I can't remember how that was fixed. IIRC, I ended up using the gc.

<jmd>That's what I did too.

<dsfdds>jmd: Start reading from "No, it's a feature!": https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/2012-12/msg00005.html

<jmd>I thought it was probably a feature. And probably a good one. But occasionally one needs to override it.

<dsfdds>So, are you trying to say we should add a special option?

<dsfdds>Also, which part of the recipe did you modify?

<jmd>A special option was my suggestion yes.

<jmd>Exactly which part, I cannot now remember

<dsfdds>I would appreciate if you send a proposal to guix-devel.

<dsfdds>I have to admit that I don't fully understand the benefits of caching in this case. My understanding is that every change of the recipe should trigger a rebuild.

<dsfdds>any*

<jmd>If I encounter the same issue again, I will make a note of the details and send such a proposal.

<dsfdds>Thank you.

<jmd>no problem. Thank *you*

<dsfdds>has anyone tried guix archive?

<civodul>Hello Guix!

<civodul>can QEMU somehow run off a read-only image?

<mark_weaver>well, it can load an initrd, which is read-only.

<mark_weaver>also, I remember reading about one of the image file formats supporting copy-on-write. maybe that could be used?

<mark_weaver>(sorry, I don't have time to properly look into it right now)

<civodul>well the qcow2 has to be read-write apparently

<civodul>i'll do some more research

<mark_weaver>what's the point of a COW image if you can't arrange to leave the original image unchanged and write only the changed blocks to another file?

<civodul>that's what i thought too :-)

<civodul>dunno, maybe i'm missing something

<mark_weaver>maybe it wouldn't be hard to modify qemu to support a read-only COW image.

<civodul>'night!

IRC channel logs

2014-01-26.log