Hi Ludovic, > Björn Höfling <bjoern.hoefl...@bjoernhoefling.de> skribis: > >> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 17:31:56 -0400 >> Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> wrote: >> >>> I guess this is related to the recent changes in graft handling, where >>> --dry-run (a.k.a. -n) no longer implies --no-grafts. It's not working >>> well for me. I hadn't updated my system since before those grafting >>> changes were made, and there's a lot for me to rebuild (I don't use >>> substitutes). I was very surprised to see this small output: >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> I can confirm this behavior for "guix system". I'm on > > Yeah, it has to do with the new build handler and the lack of > “parallelism” when building the system derivation: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2020-03/msg00337.html > > I think we’ll improve it over time by introducing more parallelism > there. > > Fundamentally though, we have to understand that ‘--dry-run’ can only > print the first derivation plans, not those that are dynamically built > as a function of build results.
Yes, of course, I agree that it's not possible to present a build plan ahead of time when grafts are enabled. That was the case before these changes, and it's the case today. The only part I don't understand is why you decided that "--dry-run" should no longer imply "--no-grafts". Does it work better for other people? For me, the "--dry-run" output has become utterly useless unless "--no-grafts" is included. Anyway, it's not that important to me. I can just fix it in my own private branch. I filed this report because I thought it might benefit other users to have this fixed upstream. Regards, Mark