GNU bug report logs -
#73166
'shell-authorized-directories' located in the wrong place?
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Nicolas Graves <ngraves <at> ngraves.fr> writes:
> Building a package yes, but you can have external commands in a
> manifest.scm or guix.scm.
>
> ...
>
> What I was saying is that we could restrain recording `guix shell --allow`
> only if the manifest builds properly containerized and without network
> access (outside package building I mean), and otherwise refuse to allow
> (failing manifest, possibly because it tries to access the network or
> files outside the repo) with a warning message, providing the ability to
> restrain "automatic loading" to certain "safer" conditions only.
I see. I think in the event that the manifest doesn't build in a
containerized environment without networking access, providing a warning
when using --allow would be quite helpful. It would inform the user of
situations where what's happening in the manifest has fewer guarantees.
If we were to do the above for --allow, but still allow the user to
bypass that via shell-authorized-directories if desired, I believe it
would be a good tradeoff: make well-behaved code easier to use, while
still allowing for less-well-behaved workflows with some minor
inconvenience.
I am assuming in the above that this wouldn't interfere with additional
channels being used in the repo.
> The downside is that we would have to basically run `guix shell
> --container` (and build all there is to build) before being able to
> run `guix shell --allow`.
As long as we properly document this, I think that that's acceptable.
--
Suhail
This bug report was last modified 186 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.