Hi Ludo, On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 09:35, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > zimoun <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> skribis: > >> $ /tmp/c/bin/guix time-machine --commit=36640207c9 -- help >> Updating channel 'guix' from Git repository at >> 'https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git'... >> Usage: guix COMMAND ARGS... >> >> $ cat ~/.cache/guix/authentication/channels/guix >> ;; List of previously-authenticated commits. >> >> ("41a2d6a8b9294a6eb8e97aaefd569e755f5f461e" >> "e70e097882699865f63eabc5fb29b4fe4468a97b") >> >> >> However, the commit 36640207c9 is not considered as authenticated, >> right? So, the older authenticated commit is the first commit used by >> time-machine, right? > > Note that it’s the closure of the commits listed in the cache that’s > considered authenticated. So not every commit is listed. > > Does that make sense?
Just to be sure to understand: 1- * 41a2d6a8b9 (newer) 2- * e70e097882 (between) 3- * 36640207c9 (older) 4- * xxxxxxxxxx (first authenticated commit) >From a fresh cache, a) if #2 is authenticated, because it is descendant of #4, it is stored and all the commits between (closure), i.e., #3 should be considered as authenticated. b) then if #1 is authenticated, because it is a descendant of the last authenticated i.e. #2, it is stored in the cache. c) now let try #3. It is considered authenticated because in the closure of #4 and #2. Yes it makes sense. All is good. :-) (And the assumption is: if Guix does not raise then it means that the commit is authenticated.) Cheers, simon
