Hi,
On dim., 15 janv. 2023 at 15:35, Josselin Poiret via Bug reports for GNU Guix
wrote:
> Julien Lepiller writes:
>
>> it seems that on one machine, my .cache/guix/checkouts got polluted by
>> uncommited files. I have no idea why they're there, but cleaning them
>> should solve my issue, thank
Hi,
On +2023-01-15 15:35:31 +0100, Josselin Poiret via Bug reports for GNU Guix
wrote:
> Hi again Julien,
>
> Julien Lepiller writes:
>
> > it seems that on one machine, my .cache/guix/checkouts got polluted by
> > uncommited files. I have no idea why they're there, but cleaning them
> > shoul
Hi again Julien,
Julien Lepiller writes:
> it seems that on one machine, my .cache/guix/checkouts got polluted by
> uncommited files. I have no idea why they're there, but cleaning them
> should solve my issue, thanks!
It's not the first time we've seen this, we could probably consider
adding a
Le Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:54:45 +0100,
Josselin Poiret a écrit :
> Hi Julien,
>
> Julien Lepiller writes:
>
> > So, apart from the output filename which obviously changes, it seems
> > that the differences are:
> >
> > - order of dependencies,
> > - source output,
> > - builder (only because it r
Hi Julien,
Julien Lepiller writes:
> So, apart from the output filename which obviously changes, it seems
> that the differences are:
>
> - order of dependencies,
> - source output,
> - builder (only because it references the source output)
>
> Here's the result of diffoscope on the source outpu
Hi Guix!
I found out today that guix pull does not compute the same derivation
on two machines, with the same architecture (x86_64), using the same
initial Guix revision (4473be9) and pulling to the same commit
(c77978d).
guix-packages-base.drv seems to be the first derivation to differ. I
get:
