[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: python-distlib vs python-distlib/next

From: Leo Prikler
Subject: Re: python-distlib vs python-distlib/next
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 13:17:48 +0200
User-agent: Evolution 3.34.2


Am Montag, den 21.06.2021, 12:32 +0200 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> Hi,
> commit ce6efff6eca0ed88cb9538803f5d1252c91a3b5e updated 
> virtualenv.  As part of this change python-distlib was replaced 
> with python-distlib/next.
> This broke the *installation* (not the build) of other packages 
> such as python-pygenometracks.  The reason is that the closure of 
> python-pygenometracks would include both python-distlib and 
> python-distlib/next.  Guix would then prevent the installation of 
> python-pygenometracks into user profiles:
> > guix package: error: profile contains conflicting entries for 
> > python-distlib
> > guix package: error:   first entry: python-distlib@0.3.1 
> > /gnu/store/mypg42bass5n61liwyq7llrwla4w8bny-python-distlib-0.3.1
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-virtualenv@20.2.1
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from python-tox@3.20.0
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-argh@0.26.2-1.dcd3253
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-gffutils@0.9-1.4034c54
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-pygenometracks@3.3
> > guix package: error:   second entry: python-distlib@0.3.0 
> > /gnu/store/fwya18dazamh2cjdkgh5wpxi7lqn4fcm-python-distlib-0.3.0
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-sortedcontainers@2.1.0
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-intervaltree@3.0.2
> > guix package: error:    ... propagated from 
> > python-pygenometracks@3.3
> We can’t easily detect these problems because they only strike at 
> installation time.  This means that we may not do partial upgrades 
> in the Python world due to the quirks of propagation.  There may 
> be other packages that are broken in a similar fashion right now.
> How can we make this more robust and avoid problems like this in 
> the future?
I think we can detect this and similar breakages through the use of
graph algorithms.  Start with all versions of your input package as
nodes and no edges.  For all packages P, add packages P' that
immediately propagate P as nodes to G and PP' as edge.  Repeat this
until closure is reached.

Your closure should now have as many components as you had versions. 
If not, then by the pigeonhole principle you have a propagation

If you want to be eager, you can also try to colour your graph, such
that each component gets a unique colour, which is assigned to the
initial P a priori (use BFS to propagate colours).  If a package would
receive two colours from that operation, you again have a propagation
conflict, but you also know which packages cause it.

I think we should be able to implement one of those algorithms in `guix
graph`.  Then people could check whether their change to a propagated
input breaks anything, whether in Python or elsewhere.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]