GNU bug report logs - #20255
'search-paths' should respect both user and system profile.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Alex Kost <alezost <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 20255 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#20255: 'search-paths' should respect both user and system profile.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:04:09 +0100

Alex Kost <alezost <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès (2015-11-22 13:52 +0300) wrote:

[...]

>> To me, what 宋文武 reported at the beginning of this thread is a
>> usability issue.  We’ve hacked around it so far, but we know there are
>> cases where the hacks aren’t enough.
>>
>> We could declare it as “won’t fix”, but I’m not comfortable with that.
>
> No, no, I'm against “won't fix”.  I don't mind if it's called a bug, and
> a solution you suggest is the best,

OK.

> but it suits only the default case of a single user profile.  If I
> have several user profiles, it does nothing useful for me, only wastes
> the time.

I think this is fine.  ~/.guix-profile is treated specially in many
ways.  I think users do not expect other profiles to be magically taken
into account.

> OK, for the bug at hand, invoking "guix package --search-paths" looks
> like the only possible solution, but please don't commit this patch
> without giving a user a chance to decide what to put in /etc/profile.

OK.

>> The solution I came up with might be inadequate.  Then we need to come
>> up with an alternate proposal, or to resign and mark it as “wontfix.”
>
> It is adequate and I'm not against it.

OK.  To me, that it takes 2 seconds on your machines suggests that it’s
not great either.

>> What would you suggest?
>
> After all, I realized what is my main concern: "/etc/profile" is
> non-editable.  If I don't like some pieces of this file, I can do
> nothing, and I just have to live with it and suffer.  Ideally I would
> like to decide what pieces I want to put in /etc/profile and what I
> don't.  But it's probably not possible, so…
>
> … what I suggest now is just to give an option to avoid generating the
> default /etc/profile.  What about making an 'operating-system' field for
> this file (similar to 'sudoers-file' or 'hosts-file')?  So when such
> 'profile-file' is specified, it will be used instead of the default one
> (of course, it should be mentioned in the manual that it's only for
> those users who are sure what they do).

I think we could make an /etc/profile-service that receives snippets
meant to be glued together into the final /etc/profile.  Users could
specify the top or bottom of the file.

There could be a combined-search-paths-service that implements the
solution I proposed here.

WDYT?

> If this 'profile-file' field appears, I will gladly use it, and I will
> not object to any future changes in /etc/profile.

Of course we want to offer this flexibility.  But I think it’s also
important to discuss the defaults, to make sure they are acceptable to
many and that they improve the “user experience.”

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.