GNU bug report logs -
#20255
'search-paths' should respect both user and system profile.
Previous Next
Full log
Message #68 received at 20255 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Ludovic Courtès (2015-11-23 02:04 +0300) wrote:
> Alex Kost <alezost <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès (2015-11-22 13:52 +0300) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> 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.
Yes, this is a good default option, all I wanted to say is if I don't
use Guix in a default way, I would like to change this default option to
suit my needs.
>>> 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?
I agree, the more ways to change a default behaviour, the better.
Although I will not use these things if there will be ‘profile-file’
field that allows to specify my own "/etc/profile".
>> 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.
Great! So is it OK to send a patch for adding ‘profile-file’ field?
> 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.”
I'm probably not the person to discuss the defaults, as very often I
find defaults inappropriate. For example, invoking "guix package
--search-paths" in /etc/profile is a totally unacceptable default for
me (sorry for mentioning it all the time :-))
--
Alex
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 27 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.