[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place
From: |
Efraim Flashner |
Subject: |
bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place |
Date: |
Mon, 17 Feb 2020 15:26:04 +0200 |
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 09:47:41AM +0100, zimoun wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 at 21:01, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Janneke 写道:
> > > https://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian/20190406T212022Z/pool/main/h/harfbuzz/harfbuzz_2.4.0.orig.tar.bz2
> >
> > This is a wonderful resource! Thank you, Janneke (and Debian)!
> >
> > zimoun 写道:
> > > Cool!
> > > But how do you determine the "date", i.e., this reference
> > > '20190406T212022Z' ?
> >
> > You'd take the timestamp immediately preceding your desired (Guix)
> > commit's date, or something like that. The fact that git commit
> > dates aren't linear shouldn't hurt here.
>
> You assume that Debian packs packages as fast as Guix, I mean on the
> same schedule which is a strong assumption IMHO.
> For example, if it was the contrary and the "new" release of harfbuzz
> 2.4.0 were missing, then would Debian be helpful?
>
>
We could first try
mirror://debian/pool/main/harfbuzz/harfbuzz_2.4.0.orig.tar.bz2
and then scrape https://snapshot.debian.org/package/harfbuzz/ for
2.4.0-1 and then parse the website for harfbuzz_2.4.0.orig.tar.bz2. Or
for just 'orig.tar'
> > Also, this doesn't seem to be a supported service yet[0]:
> >
> > “This is an implementation for a possible snapshot.debian.org
> > service.
> > It's not yet finished, it's more a prototype/proof of concept
> > to show
> > and learn what we want and can provide. So far it seems to
> > actually work.”
> >
> > Still really cool,
>
> Yes, still cool! :-)
>
>
> Thanks,
> simon
>
>
>
--
Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, (continued)
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Ludovic Courtès, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Ludovic Courtès, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/15
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2020/02/15
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Bengt Richter, 2020/02/15
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/17
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place,
Efraim Flashner <=
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2020/02/17
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/17
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2020/02/19
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/21
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Ludovic Courtès, 2020/02/21
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Ludovic Courtès, 2020/02/14
- bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, zimoun, 2020/02/15
bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2020/02/14