Hi,
Simon Tournier writes:
[...]
>> Dependent on the situation I can see one approach to be preferrable to
>> the other, and in other situations this could very well be reversed.
>
> I agree.
Why not, if someone's itch is strong enough to implement it!
>> Can we expose this choice to the comm
Maxim Cournoyer writes:
>>> I think it would be great if "guix pack -f docker" could avoid building
>>> all these identical layers again and again. Perhaps it would be
>>> possible to have a single derivation for each layer? This way we
>>> wouldn't have to recreate the same layer archives ever
Hi,
Michal Atlas skribis:
>>> Also seems that Nix's way only quickly imports the changed layers? And
>>> Guix's always imports the whole thing, at least I think?
>> What do you mean by “imports the whole thing”?
>
> I'm not sure what exactly happens, so correct me if I'm wrong, however
> if I ti
Hi,
Also seems that Nix's way only quickly imports the changed layers? And
Guix's always imports the whole thing, at least I think?
What do you mean by “imports the whole thing”?
I'm not sure what exactly happens, so correct me if I'm wrong, however
if I time the different approaches, I think
Hi,
Michal Atlas skribis:
> I greatly agree, it would be an awesome QOL improvement.
If there’s consensus, let’s see how we can get that done. The advantage
of having (guix docker) & co. all in Scheme is that moving it from a
derivation to code running straight from ‘guix pack’ is definitely
f
Hi,
On Sat, 01 Jun 2024 at 15:58, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> I think it would be great if "guix pack -f docker" could avoid building
>> all these identical layers again and again. Perhaps it would be
>> possible to have a single derivation for each layer? This way we
>> wouldn't have to recreat
On Sat 01 Jun 2024 15:58, Ludovic Courtès writes:
>> I think it would be great if "guix pack -f docker" could avoid building
>> all these identical layers again and again. Perhaps it would be
>> possible to have a single derivation for each layer? This way we
>> wouldn't have to recreate the sa
Hello Ricardo,
I greatly agree, it would be an awesome QOL improvement.
Just want to mention that it might be nice to take inspiration from the
Nix dockerTools, since they already have quite a lot of effort put into
this.
Including for example an option called `streamLayeredImage` [1] which
Ludovic Courtès writes:
>> I think it would be great if "guix pack -f docker" could avoid building
>> all these identical layers again and again. Perhaps it would be
>> possible to have a single derivation for each layer? This way we
>> wouldn't have to recreate the same layer archives every ti
Hi Guix,
a few months ago "guix pack -f docker" was modified to produce layers.
This is great! Unfortunately, "guix pack" itself still produces one big
tarball containing all these layers. There is no sharing of previously
built layers, because they are all hidden inside the pack.
I think it wo
10 matches
Mail list logo
