Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Removing Guix from Debian

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#41

Post by cozzyd »

opello wrote: post #11
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely if that's all they would just build with an explicit -std=whatever setting?

Looking at the build log in the linked Debian issue, there is an argument setting -std=c++11. It seems as though an implicit inclusion of had been provided by libstdc++ in the past and was removed as of GCC 15. https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/pull/3407 https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659176... Looks like they did in fact add the header detail to the porting guide: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15…

it would be nice if g++ had an --implicit-includes=[foo,bar] option that would make it easier for a distro to shotgun fix such incompatibilities with CXXFLAGS rather than doing real work.

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#42

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

cozzyd wrote: post #41
opello wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the build log in the linked Debian issue, there is an argument setting -std=c++11. It seems as though an implicit inclusion of had been provided by libstdc++ in the past and was removed as of GCC 15. https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/pull/3407 https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659176... Looks like they did in fact add the header detail to the porting guide: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15…

it would be nice if g++ had an --implicit-includes=[foo,bar] option that would make it easier for a distro to shotgun fix such incompatibilities with CXXFLAGS rather than doing real work.

That seems like kicking the can down the road in a way that's worse in the long run IMHO

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#43

Post by pxc »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #39
spit2wind wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "Just using Guix requires a pretty substantial amount of administrative work." Like, as a user downloading packages, or a person packaging an application? As a user downloading a package, it's been super easy for me and it's been years of running Guix with little to no issue (yet the benefits of rolling release, rollbacks, installing multiple versions of a given software etc.). As for using it to…

FWIW, not the OP but doing a guix pull after getting it from APT took several hours to crash out every time I wanted to just try using guix for something, and the ISO to install it from upstream was multiple gigabytes which seemed wild. I put a couple days into it and never actually got to try it. It's hard to have an opinion of a platform you haven't used but based on how bloated just starting it seemed to be I was…

> the ISO to install it from upstream was multiple gigabytes which seemed wild.

For the record, the Guix System install media is less than 1 GB. And the Guix installer from upstream looks to be 100 MB right now.

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#44

Post by [deleted] »

Valodim wrote: post #26
JohnFen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But most people using Debian turn popcon off. I don't at all doubt that Guix is not used by most people, but I'm quite certain the number of users is well above 230.

Can't really complain if their usage stats aren't taken into account then, I'd say?

[deleted]

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#45

Post by Ashymad »

cozzyd wrote: post #41
opello wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the build log in the linked Debian issue, there is an argument setting -std=c++11. It seems as though an implicit inclusion of had been provided by libstdc++ in the past and was removed as of GCC 15. https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/pull/3407 https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659176... Looks like they did in fact add the header detail to the porting guide: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15…

it would be nice if g++ had an --implicit-includes=[foo,bar] option that would make it easier for a distro to shotgun fix such incompatibilities with CXXFLAGS rather than doing real work.

Isn't the --include option basically that?

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#46

Post by omniglottal »

Ologn wrote: post #23
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the same virtue, https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=firefox only lists 5749 installs of firefox. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

It lists 118698 installs of firefox-esr. https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=firefox-esr

Yes, and these numbers have been established as what we in the industry call "invalid".

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#47

Post by cestith »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #22
cestith wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The locales package has over 265k installs in the same recent report that lists 231 copies of guix. That’s less than 0.09% or so.

By the same virtue, https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=firefox only lists 5749 installs of firefox. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

Besides the point already made about firefox-esr being the default package for Firefox, here are a couple of other points. First, that also means there are 5749 installations of non-default Firefox compared to 231 of guix.

Secondly, popcon works on servers and headless systems without X or Wayland. Those systems still use a package manager, and sometimes several. A graphical web browser like Firefox is unlikely to be installed without a GUI. I’ve seen plenty of systems with Snap, Flatpak, or Nix installed besides the OS-related apt, aptible, apt-get, rpm, yum, dnf, and language-related tools like pip, EasyInstall, rubygems, Bundler, cpanm, npm, cargo, OPAM, Composer, go get, or sbt with no GUI.

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#48

Post by cozzyd »

Ashymad wrote: post #45
cozzyd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it would be nice if g++ had an --implicit-includes=[foo,bar] option that would make it easier for a distro to shotgun fix such incompatibilities with CXXFLAGS rather than doing real work.

Isn't the --include option basically that?

Ah, you learn something new everyday, thanks!

Re: Removing Guix from Debian

#49

Post by ForOldHack »

cozzyd wrote: post #41
opello wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the build log in the linked Debian issue, there is an argument setting -std=c++11. It seems as though an implicit inclusion of had been provided by libstdc++ in the past and was removed as of GCC 15. https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/pull/3407 https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/659176... Looks like they did in fact add the header detail to the porting guide: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-15…

it would be nice if g++ had an --implicit-includes=[foo,bar] option that would make it easier for a distro to shotgun fix such incompatibilities with CXXFLAGS rather than doing real work.

Isn't that what AI/Vibe coding is for? ( I am kidding a lot)(Ducking thrown paper balls)
Post reply on HN