GNU bug report logs - #52347
Shell: error when -m manifest is removed

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> ist.tugraz.at>, 52347 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, cayetano.santos <at> inventati.org
Subject: bug#52347: Shell: error when -m manifest is removed
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:11:44 +0100

Hi,

On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 at 17:23, Liliana Marie Prikler
<liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> > Maybe I am doing wrong but I just 'pk' in find-file-in-parent-
> > directories. :-)
> You are doing wrong:
>
>   (if (or (not interactive?) ; true if giving -- COMMAND

Yes, indeed.  I simply grepped "manifest" and looked at
'find-file-in-parent-directories', because if it is not called, the
"manifest" file cannot be loaded. :-)  Then I incorrectly used the
wrong command line invokation.  Bad day with a lot of inattentive
today. :-/


> So the pk in find-file-in-parent-directories should not even fire.  I'm
> pretty sure the interactive constraint has a reasoning that was
> explained back then, so we should investigate carefully whether we want
> to overthrow that.  Warning, that noninteractive use of `guix shell'
> requires an explicit manifest is also an option imo.

I am in favour to keep it explicit. (Personally, I already find that
"guix shell" is wrong ;-))


> By the way, if we do search for a file, but find none, the warning
> (warning (G_ "no packages specified; creating an empty environment~%"))
> is displayed twice; once by auto-detect-manifest and once by guix-
> environment*.  We should probably change that string to something that
> indicates that we've attempted to auto-load a manifest.

I agree.

Cheers,
simon

Previous Next

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