Hi Denis,
On sam., 16 mars 2024 at 02:03, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
wrote:
> - First and most importantly, running 'guix pull' can fail sometimes,
> especially if there is not enough RAM per core. A fix that work is to
> lower the number of cores used with 'guix pull -c 1 -M 1' for
>
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, Apr 11 2024, Andreas Enge wrote:
> So if I understand correctly, 2GB is about the amount of memory needed
> for "guix pull".
Probably. By the way, nothing in my messages should be interpreted to
say that Guix's memory usage is acceptable. I am merely trying to help.
> Now
Hello,
Am Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 01:32:25PM -0700 schrieb Felix Lechner:
> I operated a 1 GB web server that ran Guix on Linode for a while. Did
> you configure a swap partition?
actually I did not, good idea!
Am Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 05:23:56AM -0700 schrieb Felix Lechner:
> There is also 'guix
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 09 2024, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> you could make Guix pull an older commit
There is also 'guix deploy' from a stronger machine, which I recommend
for any VPS.
It's a breeze to set up but does currently come with some security
implications. It requires automated SSH
Andreas Enge writes:
> I have a virtual machine that essentially runs an nginx instance and had
> 1GB of memory. This was not enough to do a "guix pull". I asked the people
> who provide the machine to me to ramp up to 2GB, but this was still not
> enough. Now I dare not ask for more, as I
Hi Andreas,
On Mon, Apr 08 2024, Andreas Enge wrote:
> I have a virtual machine that ... had 1GB of memory. This was not
> enough to do a "guix pull".
I operated a 1 GB web server that ran Guix on Linode for a while. Did
you configure a swap partition?
Kind regards
Felix
Hello,
Am Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 01:16:28AM +0100 schrieb Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli:
> The issue here is also that a given measure is very important as it
> gives some indication, but I'm also not sure that 2GiB is enough with
> all the situations. For instance a user with a browser and tons of open
>
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 12:22:40 +0100
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
> Hi there. [...]
Hi
> Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli writes:
> > On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 18:34:18 +0100
> > "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
> >> Hello, what you intend does sound very interesting. As for “guix
> >>
Hi there. Some corrections.
Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli writes:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 18:34:18 +0100
> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
>> Hello, what you intend does sound very interesting. As for “guix
>> time-machine”, I do not see the problem [...]
> Let's say a user install Guix 1.4.0 and
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 18:34:18 +0100
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
> Hello, what you intend does sound very interesting. As for “guix
> time-machine”, I do not see the problem [...]
Let's say a user install Guix 1.4.0 and GNU Boot use a guix commit after
v1.4.0, as I understand guix
Hello, what you intend does sound very interesting. As for “guix
time-machine”, I do not see the problem:
Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli writes:
> But then we would still like to somehow make guix time-machine
> --commit= work automatically, so we need to somehow fetch that
> revision, and if possible
On Guix integration:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:17:39 +0100
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
> Side note, as an observer from outside, it also seems relevant how the
> project goal is different from Canoeboot. Is the difference that GNU
> Boot seeks to integrate more with
Le mercredi 20 mars 2024 à 13:15 +0100, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) a écrit :
> Hello Denis.
>
> I believe automatically invoking package managers for users does not
> give users control. Telling them what to run, yes, but running the
> commands for them does not seem like good practice, if it
Le jeudi 21 mars 2024 à 17:26 +0100, Adrien 'neox' Bourmault a écrit :
> >
> > Last time I checked, guix operations like pull needed almost 2GB RAM,
> > because of Guile compilation not optimizing for memory use yet.
>
> Yes, I know that and this is something I measured myself.
Sorry, I did not
Hello. Sorry for not being precise. Invoking guix build or guix
shell is fine in my opinion, but “apt-get install” is not.
Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli writes:
> Here running 'guix build' commands automatically makes sense and as I
> understand many people sharing their Guix configurations do that,
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 17:35:25 +0100
Adrien 'neox' Bourmault wrote:
> Sorry, I did not see earlier this was a question Denis asked. I
> measured that recently and did not have the time to tell him. Thanks
> for your answer.
Thanks a lot for the test.
The issue here is also that a given measure
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:15:17 +0100
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote:
> Hello Denis.
Hi,
> I believe automatically invoking package managers for users does not
> give users control. Telling them what to run, yes, but running the
> commands for them does not seem like good practice, if it can
Hello Denis.
I believe automatically invoking package managers for users does not
give users control. Telling them what to run, yes, but running the
commands for them does not seem like good practice, if it can be
avoided. If I were a user, I would mostly like to understand.
In particular, the
Hi,
I'm one of the co-maintainers of GNU Boot, a project aimed at replace
nonfree boot firmwares that comes with computers with fully free
software.
For that we reuse software like Coreboot, GRUB, SeaBIOS, etc that are
combined into installable images. Most of the code is still inherited
from
19 matches
Mail list logo
