Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> skribis:
>>
>>> Here's a suggested patch:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gnu/system/install.scm b/gnu/system/install.scm
>>> index 799851c..10fbfdd 100644
>>> --- a/gnu/system/install.scm
>>> +++ b/gnu/system/install.scm
>>> @@ -71,7 +71,14 @@ under /root/.guix-profile where GUIX is installed."
>>> (with-directory-excursion %root
>>> (zero? (system* "tar" "--xz" "--format=gnu"
>>> "--owner=root:0" "--group=root:0"
>>> - "-cvf" #$output ".")))))
>>> + "-cvf" #$output
>>> + ;; Avoid adding /, /var, or /root to the
>>> tarball,
>>> + ;; so that the ownership and permissions of
>>> those
>>> + ;; directories will not be overwritten when
>>> + ;; extracting the archive.
>>> + "./root/.guix-profile"
>>> + "./var/guix"
>>> + "./gnu")))))
>>>
>>> (gexp->derivation "guix-tarball.tar.xz" build
>>> #:references-graphs `(("profile" ,profile))
>>>
>>> If we did this, then we could revert 8c3a5d7059 and avoid any use of
>>> --skip-old-files. I would be in favor of this.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> Yes, that’s even better, please commit and revert 8c3a5d7059.
>
> Done.
>
> I would advocate releasing 0.8.3 ASAP with these fixes, since the binary
> installation method in 0.8.2 has such serious problems.
>
> What do you think?
Not sure if “serious” is appropriate (those who tested it a month ago
had no problems using it, despite the UID issue), but yes, we should aim
for a quick release. This time, we need to get feedback /before/ the
release. ;-)
I also want to fully understand the problem that Ricardo reported before
we release again.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
