[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’ |
Date: |
Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:18:14 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
On Fri 10 Mar 2017 22:50, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> I had it on my to-do list and Andy said he’d like to have something like
> that to publish Guile 2.2 binaries: the ‘guix pack’ command below is a
> generalization of the code that builds the Guix binary tarball¹. It
> creates a bundle of the closure of the given packages, with a profile
> containing all the packages.
Very cool, thank you!!!
> Andy, does this correspond to what you have in mind?
Yes, though I hadn't thought everything out. I guess my mail question
is about user experience -- this is going to be a gateway for people to
get Guix and Guile and we should make sure there are no rough edges. I
guess in particular I have a concern about users overwriting their
/var/guix. (No worries about overwriting /gnu/store of course.)
Particularly if a user installs one "guix pack" then installs another
"guix pack", what happens? Does the /var/guix tarball include the
sqlite db? Could it be overwritten? What if the user had already
installed Guix already; does this silently trash their Guix install?
A bug report: I just tried it but it seems guix pack doesn't respect
--no-build-hook for some reason, and also for some reason on this
machine my Guix daemon fails with "offload: command not found", which I
was getting around via --no-build-hook.
I guess what would be ideal would be:
cd /
sudo tar xvf aasdfafasdfjasdaldfhasdfh-guile.tar.xz
and then telling the user to run via
/gnu/store/asasdfadfgsadfa-profile/bin/guile. That way there is very
little risk of trashing the user's system.
Of course we could also provide them a README of sorts for all the load
paths, but in the end this is a gateway to the real experience :)
I guess for binary installs you would of course want /var/guix, the
database, and the profiles. I think in that case it makes sense to add
an option to --pack about including them, and have it default to off
(given the potential to trample a user's store).
WDYT? Any of this make sense? :)
Andy
- Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/10
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ricardo Wurmus, 2017/03/10
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Chris Marusich, 2017/03/11
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’,
Andy Wingo <=
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/14
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Andy Wingo, 2017/03/14
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/14
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Federico Beffa, 2017/03/19
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/19
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Federico Beffa, 2017/03/20
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/20
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Andy Wingo, 2017/03/21
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Federico Beffa, 2017/03/22
- Re: Introducing ‘guix pack’, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/24