Re: guix.el & multiple outputs

[Alex Kost]

Ludovic Courtès (2014-09-21 23:37 +0400) wrote:

> Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès (2014-09-07 01:11 +0400) wrote:
>>
>>> Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer <address@hidden> skribis:
>>>
>>>> By the way, it might be nice to have an option to list the secondary
>>>> outputs of a package explicitly alongside the normal, as if it were just
>>>> another package.
>>>
>>> Currently *Guix Package List* shows, for instance:
>>>
>>>   gcc-toolchain        4.9.1      out, debug    debug, out    Complete GCC 
>>> tool chain for C/C++ development
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that it should instead show it as two lines?
>>>
>>>   gcc-toolchain        4.9.1      out      yes   Complete GCC tool chain 
>>> for C/C++ development
>>>   gcc-toolchain        4.9.1      debug    yes   Complete GCC tool chain 
>>> for C/C++ development
>>>
>>> I think I would prefer it.  (One advantage is that it would allow users
>>> to mark just one specific output, which is not currently possible.)
>
> [...]
>
>> As for the changes visible to a user: now it is possible to get a list
>> of outputs with “(setq guix-package-list-type 'output)”.  Should it be
>> default?
>
> The list of outputs means there’s one line for each output, as in the
> example above, right?

Yes.

> I would make it the default, yes.

OK, I made it the default option.

>> Another UI question: RET in “*Guix Package List*” buffer describes
>> current package(s) in “*Guix Package Info*” buffer.  Analogously, RET in
>> “*Guix Output List*” buffer describes current output(s) in “*Guix Output
>> Info*” buffer.  However I think it's not very useful: “output-info”
>> buffer is very similar to “package-info” but it contains only one output
>> per package info.  So I think it would be better to display a usual
>> “package-info” buffer (with all available outputs for a package) when a
>> user press RET in a list of outputs.  [not a clear description, isn't it :-)]
>> WDYT?
>
> I would prefer having just *Guix Package List* and *Guix Package Info*
> (each listing all the outputs of packages), and not *Guix Output List*
> and *Guix Output Info*.
>
> Would it be possible?

Absolutely.

[...]

> I think this convinced me that it’s better to just have the
> ‘package-info’ and the ‘package-list’ buffer do the right thing.  The
> added complexity above may be intimidating to users.

Yes, you are right that defaults should be more user friendly :-)
I've made appropriate changes, so now the only difference a user will
see in the new version is that there are outputs (not packages) listed
in *Guix Package List* buffer.

And to return to the previous variant, one may use (it is documented):

  (setq guix-package-list-type 'package)

A modified patch is attached.

0002-emacs-Add-support-for-displaying-outputs.patch
Description: Text Data