GNU bug report logs - #50960
[PATCH 00/10] Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment'

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2021 10:22:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #203 received at 50960 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>, Ludovic
 Courtès
 <ludovic.courtes <at> inria.fr>, 50960 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#50960: [PATCH 00/10] Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix
 environment'
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 09:45:31 +0200
Am Freitag, den 08.10.2021, 17:45 +0200 schrieb Konrad Hinsen:
> Hi Ludo and Liliana,
> 
> > To me it’s the same as ‘guix environment’, but with a slightly
> > different command-line interface; ‘guix environment’ was already
> > serves these two use cases.
> 
> Indeed, but the new proposal goes much further with supporting
> interactive convenience, in particular via the controversial reading
> of guix.scm and/or manifest.scm. That's a convenience I'd like to
> have interactively, but not something I expect from an infrastructure
> tool that ends up being used in lengthy shell script. For the latter,
> the "Zen of Python wisdom" of "explicit is better than implicit"
> matters a lot. On the command line, it makes life harder, in
> particular for bad typists such as myself.
> 
> > Perhaps to avoid this trouble, guix shell could read a file that
> > simply specifies which arguments to add one line at a time e.g.
> > 
> >   ;; .guix-shell-rc
> >   --manifest=manifest.scm
> 
> That's a nice idea, but again something I wouldn't want an
> infrastructure tool to do. When I use "guix environment" or "guix
> shell" in a script or workflow, I want whatever it does to be as
> independent as possible from my machine or account, except when I
> explicitly say the contrary.
People do use “emacs -Q” so there's no hard “one way or the other”
requirement.  All we would need to do is offer a similar flag to
prevent reading the rc file, no?

Cheers,
Liliana





This bug report was last modified 3 years and 210 days ago.

Previous Next


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