Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello! > > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: > >> I've recently gave an explanation of why I think using `guix pull` >> before installing GuixSD should not be recommended unconditionally: >> >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/2016-11/msg00047.html >> >> In the specific case of installing GuixSD 0.11.0 today, `guix pull` is >> necessary, because we lack the substitutes, and some packages can't be >> built at all now [1]. But, adding these lines to the manual now won't >> make it show up in the 0.11.0 installer manual. >> >> I think we should work on improving our infrastructure in the next >> release cycle, and revisit this change to the manual if we are still >> having problems before the 0.13.0 release. >> >> What does everyone think? > > I agree with everything you wrote here. > > Ludo’.
I think I too agree here. Especially as my experience (running GuixSD on i686 bare metal) suggests that `guix pull` can actually result in packages that do not quite build reliably. There currently seems to be a `guix pull` sweet spot when the substitutes are not too old yet the recipes not too new… I think the best solution would definitely be guaranteed availability of substitutes for releases until at least the next release — so I greatly appreciate the work that is being done to on the infrastructure side. My 2¢, Alex
