Hi, Maxime Devos <maximede...@telenet.be> skribis:
> Arun Isaac schreef op do 02-06-2022 om 20:36 [+0530]: >> Hi Maxime, >> >> > To avoid a world-rebuild, you could for now make a module (guix build >> > symlinks) or such? An alternative is (gnu build activation), but then >> > some (guix ...) modules would depend on (gnu ...). >> >> I don't really mind waiting for the next core-updates cycle. This >> problem has been around for a long time. It wouldn't hurt much to wait a >> bit longer. If there is consensus on this change, I can send a >> patch. WDYT? > > Downside of (guix build utils): it makes it harder to modify switch- > symlinks. I don't know if that's too much of a downside in practice. > Also, there is a bug in switch-symlinks: > > (use-modules (guix utils)) > ;; simulate an interrupted switch-symlinks (C-c, power interruption, ...) > (symlink "target" "link.new") > ;; now try again > (switch-symlinks "link" "target") > > ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception: > In procedure symlink: Bestand bestaat al: "link.new" That’s EACCES? > If we move it to (guix build utils), I'd prefer the bug to be addressed first. Yes, better be cautious before “setting it in stone”. Do you have a fix in mind? With this issue addressed, I think it’s fine to move to (guix build utils) on ‘core-updates’. We’ll have to run ‘make check’ to make sure all users are updated, probably with #:select to clarify what binding they need from (guix build utils). Thanks, Ludo’.