Re: guix-shell?

[Ludovic Courtès]

David Thompson <address@hidden> skribis:

> I abandoned the profile approach and tried to implement something
> similar to what nix-shell does: Build all input derivations and set the
> environment variables that a builder would set.  My primary reason for
> using the low-level derivations instead of high-level package inputs is
> that the derivations include information about all of the implicit
> inputs as well.

That makes sense.

What about:

  1. Computing the list of search-path-specifications of all the
     transitive inputs of the package, the way ‘package-derivation’
     does it;

  2. Computing, based on these specifications and all the input
     derivations, the actual search paths, the way ‘set-paths’ does it?

Unless I’m mistaken, this would be equivalent to what happens with
‘build-system’ implementations, so that should work.

HTH!
Ludo’.