GNU bug report logs -
#31159
Reverse order for old grub.cfg entries
Previous Next
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 31159 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 31159 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Sun, 15 Apr 2018 03:21:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
.
(Sun, 15 Apr 2018 03:21:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi!
This is a pretty minor issue, but I've found that the "GNU system, old
configurations..." part of the menu would be nicer if the most recent
generations were listed at the top, rather than the oldest generations.
Currently it lists generation 1 as the first entry in the list, and if
I've got 50+ generations installed and I don't want to boot the current
generation, I'm most likely going to want to revert to one of the more
recent generations rather than the very oldest.
live well,
vagrant
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:13:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
That's actually a pretty good idea!
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org> writes:
> Hi!
>
> This is a pretty minor issue, but I've found that the "GNU system, old
> configurations..." part of the menu would be nicer if the most recent
> generations were listed at the top, rather than the oldest generations.
>
> Currently it lists generation 1 as the first entry in the list, and if
> I've got 50+ generations installed and I don't want to boot the current
> generation, I'm most likely going to want to revert to one of the more
> recent generations rather than the very oldest.
>
> live well,
> vagrant
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:35:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org> writes:
> This is a pretty minor issue, but I've found that the "GNU system, old
> configurations..." part of the menu would be nicer if the most recent
> generations were listed at the top, rather than the oldest generations.
>
> Currently it lists generation 1 as the first entry in the list, and if
> I've got 50+ generations installed and I don't want to boot the current
> generation, I'm most likely going to want to revert to one of the more
> recent generations rather than the very oldest.
I agree that it would be better to reverse the order of these entries.
Thanks,
Mark
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Tue, 17 Apr 2018 08:17:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,
This seems like a good idea ! If we decide to make it unconditional the
patch attached does the job. We can also make it configurable in
bootloader-configuration for instance.
WDYT ?
Mathieu
[0001-scripts-system-Sort-profile-generations-in-reverse-o.patch (text/x-diff, inline)]
From 3ec63fb55a074b547724c70d560cc61776c9298e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:23:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] scripts: system: Sort profile generations in reverse order.
* guix/scripts/system.scm (profile-boot-parameters): Reverse
generation-numbers list. This allows old generations to be listed from most
recent to oldest in bootloaders configuration files.
---
guix/scripts/system.scm | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/guix/scripts/system.scm b/guix/scripts/system.scm
index b50cabc..7e1363c 100644
--- a/guix/scripts/system.scm
+++ b/guix/scripts/system.scm
@@ -393,9 +393,11 @@ it atomically, and then run OS's activation script."
"~Y-~m-~d ~H:~M")))
(define* (profile-boot-parameters #:optional (profile %system-profile)
- (numbers (generation-numbers profile)))
- "Return a list of 'boot-parameters' for the generations of PROFILE specified by
-NUMBERS, which is a list of generation numbers."
+ (numbers
+ (reverse (generation-numbers profile))))
+ "Return a list of 'boot-parameters' for the generations of PROFILE specified
+by NUMBERS, which is a list of generation numbers. The list is ordered from
+the most recent to the oldest profiles."
(define (system->boot-parameters system number time)
(unless-file-not-found
(let* ((params (read-boot-parameters-file system))
--
2.7.4
[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]
Mark H Weaver writes:
> Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org> writes:
>
>> This is a pretty minor issue, but I've found that the "GNU system, old
>> configurations..." part of the menu would be nicer if the most recent
>> generations were listed at the top, rather than the oldest generations.
>>
>> Currently it lists generation 1 as the first entry in the list, and if
>> I've got 50+ generations installed and I don't want to boot the current
>> generation, I'm most likely going to want to revert to one of the more
>> recent generations rather than the very oldest.
>
> I agree that it would be better to reverse the order of these entries.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com> writes:
> This seems like a good idea ! If we decide to make it unconditional the
> patch attached does the job. We can also make it configurable in
> bootloader-configuration for instance.
>
> WDYT ?
Thank you, Mathieu! I doubt that there's a need to make this
configurable, but I'd like to hear an opinion from Ludovic, since I
guess he was the one who implemented the current ordering.
What do you think, Ludovic?
Mark
> From 3ec63fb55a074b547724c70d560cc61776c9298e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:23:00 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] scripts: system: Sort profile generations in reverse order.
>
> * guix/scripts/system.scm (profile-boot-parameters): Reverse
> generation-numbers list. This allows old generations to be listed from most
> recent to oldest in bootloaders configuration files.
> ---
> guix/scripts/system.scm | 8 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/guix/scripts/system.scm b/guix/scripts/system.scm
> index b50cabc..7e1363c 100644
> --- a/guix/scripts/system.scm
> +++ b/guix/scripts/system.scm
> @@ -393,9 +393,11 @@ it atomically, and then run OS's activation script."
> "~Y-~m-~d ~H:~M")))
>
> (define* (profile-boot-parameters #:optional (profile %system-profile)
> - (numbers (generation-numbers profile)))
> - "Return a list of 'boot-parameters' for the generations of PROFILE specified by
> -NUMBERS, which is a list of generation numbers."
> + (numbers
> + (reverse (generation-numbers profile))))
> + "Return a list of 'boot-parameters' for the generations of PROFILE specified
> +by NUMBERS, which is a list of generation numbers. The list is ordered from
> +the most recent to the oldest profiles."
> (define (system->boot-parameters system number time)
> (unless-file-not-found
> (let* ((params (read-boot-parameters-file system))
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:05:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org> skribis:
> Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> This seems like a good idea ! If we decide to make it unconditional the
>> patch attached does the job. We can also make it configurable in
>> bootloader-configuration for instance.
>>
>> WDYT ?
>
> Thank you, Mathieu! I doubt that there's a need to make this
> configurable, but I'd like to hear an opinion from Ludovic, since I
> guess he was the one who implemented the current ordering.
>
> What do you think, Ludovic?
I agree with you. As long as the entry labels clearly show which one is
the most recent, that sounds good.
However! On headless machines, we’d rather make sure users know about
this change. On our Libreboot “bayfront” server, GRUB for some reason
fails to display anything, and on several occasions we’ve had to blindly
select an older generation. Hopefully this is an unusual situation ;-),
but it could happen on ARM boards as well.
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Ludovic,
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> I agree with you. As long as the entry labels clearly show which one is
> the most recent, that sounds good.
>
> However! On headless machines, we’d rather make sure users know about
> this change. On our Libreboot “bayfront” server, GRUB for some reason
> fails to display anything, and on several occasions we’ve had to blindly
> select an older generation. Hopefully this is an unusual situation ;-),
> but it could happen on ARM boards as well.
Do you have an idea of how to make sure that users know about it?
Mark
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Wed, 18 Apr 2018 20:15:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org> skribis:
> ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> I agree with you. As long as the entry labels clearly show which one is
>> the most recent, that sounds good.
>>
>> However! On headless machines, we’d rather make sure users know about
>> this change. On our Libreboot “bayfront” server, GRUB for some reason
>> fails to display anything, and on several occasions we’ve had to blindly
>> select an older generation. Hopefully this is an unusual situation ;-),
>> but it could happen on ARM boards as well.
>
> Do you have an idea of how to make sure that users know about it?
Not really. I think we can at least send a heads-up to guix-devel and
help-guix.
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 19 Apr 2018 15:23:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> Not really. I think we can at least send a heads-up to guix-devel and
> help-guix.
Ok. Would the attached patch earlier in the thread be ok for you then ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:17:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #32 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>> Not really. I think we can at least send a heads-up to guix-devel and
>> help-guix.
>
> Ok. Would the attached patch earlier in the thread be ok for you then ?
Sure!
Ludo'.
Added tag(s) fixed.
Request was from
clement <at> lassieur.org (Clément Lassieur)
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 31 May 2018 09:22:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
bug closed, send any further explanations to
31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org and Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
Request was from
clement <at> lassieur.org (Clément Lassieur)
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 31 May 2018 09:22:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 31 May 2018 22:08:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #39 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 2018-05-31, GNU bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report
> #31159: Reverse order for old grub.cfg entries,
> which was filed against the guix package.
>
> Thank you for your report, which has now been closed.
> You can view the full report at
> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=31159
I don't see that the proposed patch was applied to any of the guix
branches I'm aware of. Has it been merged and just not yet been pushed?
Does it need to go to guix-patches instead of guix-bugs?
Thanks!
live well,
vagrant
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#31159
; Package
guix
.
(Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:20:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #42 received at 31159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
reopen 31159
tags 31159 - fixed
thanks
Hi Clément,
According to our bug tracking system, you added the "fixed" tag to bug
31159 and closed it. I think this must have been a mistake. Did you
intend to close a different bug? This bug has to do with the fact that
the order of old grub.cfg entries should arguably be reversed.
Mark
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org> writes:
> On 2018-05-31, GNU bug Tracking System wrote:
>> This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report
>> #31159: Reverse order for old grub.cfg entries,
>> which was filed against the guix package.
>>
>> Thank you for your report, which has now been closed.
>> You can view the full report at
>> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=31159
>
> I don't see that the proposed patch was applied to any of the guix
> branches I'm aware of. Has it been merged and just not yet been pushed?
> Does it need to go to guix-patches instead of guix-bugs?
>
> Thanks!
>
> live well,
> vagrant
Did not alter fixed versions and reopened.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Removed tag(s) fixed.
Request was from
Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Reply sent
to
Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe <at> gmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Fri, 01 Jun 2018 07:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Fri, 01 Jun 2018 07:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #51 received at 31159-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
I tought this one was pushed and told Clément it was ok to push, my
mistake! I just pushed it, so I close the ticket now.
To people used to select bootloader entries with shortcuts, be aware
that at next reconfigure, the entries will be reversed on all
bootloaders (top of the list => most recent configuration).
Thanks,
Mathieu
Mark H Weaver writes:
> reopen 31159
> tags 31159 - fixed
> thanks
>
> Hi Clément,
>
> According to our bug tracking system, you added the "fixed" tag to bug
> 31159 and closed it. I think this must have been a mistake. Did you
> intend to close a different bug? This bug has to do with the fact that
> the order of old grub.cfg entries should arguably be reversed.
>
> Mark
>
>
> Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org> writes:
>
>> On 2018-05-31, GNU bug Tracking System wrote:
>>> This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report
>>> #31159: Reverse order for old grub.cfg entries,
>>> which was filed against the guix package.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your report, which has now been closed.
>>> You can view the full report at
>>> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=31159
>>
>> I don't see that the proposed patch was applied to any of the guix
>> branches I'm aware of. Has it been merged and just not yet been pushed?
>> Does it need to go to guix-patches instead of guix-bugs?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> live well,
>> vagrant
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:24:05 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 5 years and 274 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.