GNU bug report logs - #46031
services: cuirass: Add "simple-cuirass-services".

Previous Next

Full log

Message #31 received at 46031 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 46031 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#46031: services: cuirass: Add "simple-cuirass-services".
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 11:59:38 +0100

Hi,

Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org> skribis:

> Here is a service that provides some syntactic sugar over the (complex)
> Cuirass configuration.  It uses Guix Channels to declare Cuirass inputs.
>
> In the future, it would be nice if Cuirass could operate directly on
> Channels. For now, this service only act as a translation layer for
> people willing to setup a simple Cuirass instance.

I had overlooked these patches; that’s really nice!

> +@lisp
> +(simple-cuirass-services
> + (simple-cuirass-configuration
> +  (build (list
> +          (build-manifest
> +           (channel-name 'conf)
> +           (manifest "guix/manifest.scm"))))
> +  (channels (cons* (channel
> +                    (name 'my-guix)
> +                    (url "https://my-git-repo/guix.git"))
> +                   (channel
> +                    (name 'conf)
> +                    (url "https://my-git-repo/conf.git"))
> +                   %default-channels))
> +  (non-package-channels '(conf))))
> +@end lisp

I wonder if it would make sense to allow users to pass directly a
manifest, as in (pseudo syntax):

  (simple-cuirass-configuration
    (build (list (build-manifest … (local-file "my-manifest.scm"))))
    (channels …))

It’d be less expressive (you’d have to reconfigure when you change the
manifest), but perhaps easier to set up.  WDYT?

> +  (define (config->spec config)
> +    (match-record config <simple-cuirass-configuration>
> +      (build channels non-package-channels systems)
> +      `((#:name . "simple-config")
> +        (#:load-path-inputs . ("guix"))
> +        (#:package-path-inputs . ,(package-path channels
> +                                                non-package-channels))
> +        (#:proc-input . "guix")
> +        (#:proc-file . "build-aux/cuirass/gnu-system.scm")
> +        (#:proc . cuirass-jobs)
> +        (#:proc-args . ((systems . ,systems)
> +                        ,@(if (eq? build 'all)
> +                              '()
> +                              `((subset . "manifests")
> +                                (manifests . ,(format-manifests build))))))
> +        (#:inputs  . ,(map channel->input channels))
> +        (#:build-outputs . ())
> +        (#:priority . 1))))
> +
> +  (list
> +   (service cuirass-service-type
> +            (cuirass-configuration
> +             (inherit cuirass)
> +             (specifications #~(list
> +                                '#$(config->spec config)))))

What about exposing ‘simple-cuirass-configuration->specs’, and document
it such that one can do:

  (service cuirass-service-type
           (cuirass-configuration
             (specifications
              (simple-cuirass-configuration->specs config))))

or even:

  (service cuirass-service-type
           (compile-simple-cuirass-configuration config))

?

That way, the relationship between “simple” and “not simple” would be
clearer.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

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