On 11/01/2015 10:16 PM, Ericson, John wrote: > If I recall Eelco's thesis correctly, the derivation is built in a > temporary location, the build is hashed, and then the binary is mangled > so the temp path is replaced with the proper /path/to/store/hash/ path. > Well if we just stick the data in IPFS before the path replacement, and > let the other side do the mangling we dodge that problem.
I don't think that would work, as hash rewriting *changes* the standard hash of the path (self-referencing problem). Nitpicks: you all seem to use "intentional" instead of "intensional", but the name doesn't really matter, which is incidentally the only thing that would much change during ex->in switch. I don't really get why people call for it so much. The only useful (possible) consequence I can think of is that when we e.g. update some build tool, the builds using this tool would likely result into the same path, so the rebuild would *not* cascade like it does now. It would only cut non-runtime indirect dependencies, which isn't really so much, and we would have to deal somehow with the equivalence classes allowing such "sharing". Source mirroring is a thing completely independent of nix(os), so it might have much larger chance of being successful, as P2P IMHO pays off only when you get many clients. Vladimir
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
