GNU bug report logs - #30410
[PATCH 2/2] doc: Document the --manifest option for guix pack.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #14 received at 30410 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: myglc2 <at> gmail.com
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
Cc: 30410 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#30410] [PATCH 2/2] doc: Document the --manifest option for
 guix pack.
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 23:04:30 -0500

On 02/13/2018 at 09:23 Konrad Hinsen writes:
Hi  Konrad,

> Hi George,
>
>> FWIW, here are a few thoughts ...
>>
>> It would be helpful to add an example or two of "list of packages".
>
> That basically means that my doc isn't clear enough :-(
>
> There is no special "list of packages". What I refer to is a command
> line with multiple package arguments, either package names or -e <Expr>
> arguments.
>
> The point is that "-m manifest.scm" and package-name or -e arguments
> are mutually exclusive.
>
> The problem I had with formulating this is that package-name arguments
> are never explicitly mentioned in the documentation, only options are
> documented. The only way to know that you can just list package names on
> the command line is looking at the examples.

Yeah, in the doc "list of packages" might mean a scheme list or "naming
one or more packages on the command line" or a “manifest” object (which
is roughly a list of packages) ;-) But maybe that's not your problem.

> Any idea of how to do this better?

I thought you were saying that --manifest would accept a manifest form
or a list of packages. But now I think I get it.

How about saying packages may be specified by the -m option or the -e
option or an explicit list of packages on the command line.

- or -

packages may be specified by only one of the following methods: the -m
option, the -e option, or an explicit list on the command line.

HTH - George

Previous Next

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