GNU bug report logs - #52897
[PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build daemon with doas.

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 52897 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 52897 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
Subject: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build daemon with doas.
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 06:11:56 -0500

* doc/guix.texi (Upgrading Guix): Give instructions on upgrading the
build daemon with doas.
---
 doc/guix.texi | 14 +++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index ebfcfee7f7..a5ae7dcbe7 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -2025,15 +2025,23 @@ guix pull
 @cindex upgrading the Guix daemon, on a foreign distro
 @cindex @command{guix pull} for the root user, on a foreign distro
 
-On a foreign distro, you can upgrade the build daemon by running:
+On a foreign distro, you can upgrade the build daemon by running the
+following command if using @command{sudo}:
 
 @example
 sudo -i guix pull
 @end example
 
 @noindent
-followed by (assuming your distro uses the systemd service management
-tool):
+Or, the following if using @command{doas}:
+
+@example
+doas -u root guix pull
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+After upgrading the build daemon, (assuming your distro uses the systemd
+service management tool):
 
 @example
 systemctl restart guix-daemon.service
-- 
2.34.1

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: jgart via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>, 52897 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
Subject: Re: [bug#52897] [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the
 build daemon with doas.
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:55:24 +0100

Hi,

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 at 06:11, jgart via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> +Or, the following if using @command{doas}:
> +
> +@example
> +doas -u root guix pull
> +@end example

Is it installed by default on some distro?

If not, it implies that ’doas’ user install ’doas’ instead of ’sudo’,
thus it means these users know how to replace ’sudo’ by whatever other
commands they would prefer.

(For instance, it is the first time I heard about this ’doas’
command. :-))

Cheers,
simon

Message #14 received at 52897 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>, 52897 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 23:49:59 -0500

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Is it installed by default on some distro?

It's originally made by the openBSD guys I think and that's probably the
only place it is pre-installed. (If it matters please fact check me as
that's from memory)

> If not, it implies that ’doas’ user install ’doas’ instead of ’sudo’,
> thus it means these users know how to replace ’sudo’ by whatever other
> commands they would prefer.

Since 99.9% of usecases for sudo and doas are simply "doas thing" I have
no clue how to use either of them and appreciate documentation telling
me what flags to put.

I've explicitly removed sudo from my machine as supposedly sudo is a
large complex codebase that likely has bugs (although that's probably
just openBSD propaganda).

That being said, it is kinda niche.  I say this is a good patch but I
also wouldn't fight dissenters that hard.

Message #17 received at 52897 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>
Cc: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>, 52897 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 18:01:12 +0100

Hi,

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 23:49, Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com> wrote:

> I've explicitly removed sudo from my machine as supposedly sudo is a
> large complex codebase that likely has bugs (although that's probably
> just openBSD propaganda).

Guix documentation uniquely relies on ’sudo’.  And for instance, I was
not aware of such propaganda. :-)

Well, I do not have an opinion, but AFAIK, Guix does not work on the top
of OpenBSD (yet! who knows if someone will not port a BSD kernel with a
GNU userland as Debian did some time ago [1] ;-))

For me, it is a niche and for consistency, all the commands using ’sudo’
should also provide the ’doas’ way.  And I am not convinced the burden
is worth.  Well, I do not have an opinion.

1: <https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/index.en.html>


Cheers,
simon

Message #22 received at 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 14:27:47 -0400

Hello,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 23:49, Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> I've explicitly removed sudo from my machine as supposedly sudo is a
>> large complex codebase that likely has bugs (although that's probably
>> just openBSD propaganda).
>
> Guix documentation uniquely relies on ’sudo’.  And for instance, I was
> not aware of such propaganda. :-)
>
> Well, I do not have an opinion, but AFAIK, Guix does not work on the top
> of OpenBSD (yet! who knows if someone will not port a BSD kernel with a
> GNU userland as Debian did some time ago [1] ;-))
>
> For me, it is a niche and for consistency, all the commands using ’sudo’
> should also provide the ’doas’ way.  And I am not convinced the burden
> is worth.  Well, I do not have an opinion.

I'm also not convinced it brings much, especially since Guix can't be
used where 'doas' is likely to be encountered (BSDs).

Closing.

Thanks for the discussion!

Maxim

Message #25 received at 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 19:15:21 -0500

On Thu, 07 Jul 2022 14:27:47 -0400 Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 23:49, Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I've explicitly removed sudo from my machine as supposedly sudo is a
> >> large complex codebase that likely has bugs (although that's probably
> >> just openBSD propaganda).
> >
> > Guix documentation uniquely relies on ’sudo’.  And for instance, I was
> > not aware of such propaganda. :-)
> >
> > Well, I do not have an opinion, but AFAIK, Guix does not work on the top
> > of OpenBSD (yet! who knows if someone will not port a BSD kernel with a
> > GNU userland as Debian did some time ago [1] ;-))
> >
> > For me, it is a niche and for consistency, all the commands using ’sudo’
> > should also provide the ’doas’ way.  And I am not convinced the burden
> > is worth.  Well, I do not have an opinion.
> 
> I'm also not convinced it brings much, especially since Guix can't be
> used where 'doas' is likely to be encountered (BSDs).

FWIW, I use doas on Debian and alpine linux was considering replacing sudo with doas ;()

But, yes. This is low priority for me right now so that's fine to close it :)

I may experiment with doas in a guix channel instead.

ps

Here's the arch wiki page on doas:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Doas

Some memey resources of questionable merit on doas:

https://www.techwarrant.com/alpine-linux-wants-to-replace-sudo-command-with-openbsds-doas/
https://invidious.projectsegfau.lt/watch?v=brXd12LstgA
https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=A5buxcYXp7k

Message #28 received at 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
Cc: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2022 21:36:33 -0400

Hi jgart,

jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de> writes:

> On Thu, 07 Jul 2022 14:27:47 -0400 Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 23:49, Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I've explicitly removed sudo from my machine as supposedly sudo is a
>> >> large complex codebase that likely has bugs (although that's probably
>> >> just openBSD propaganda).
>> >
>> > Guix documentation uniquely relies on ’sudo’.  And for instance, I was
>> > not aware of such propaganda. :-)
>> >
>> > Well, I do not have an opinion, but AFAIK, Guix does not work on the top
>> > of OpenBSD (yet! who knows if someone will not port a BSD kernel with a
>> > GNU userland as Debian did some time ago [1] ;-))
>> >
>> > For me, it is a niche and for consistency, all the commands using ’sudo’
>> > should also provide the ’doas’ way.  And I am not convinced the burden
>> > is worth.  Well, I do not have an opinion.
>> 
>> I'm also not convinced it brings much, especially since Guix can't be
>> used where 'doas' is likely to be encountered (BSDs).
>
> FWIW, I use doas on Debian and alpine linux was considering replacing sudo with doas ;()
>
> But, yes. This is low priority for me right now so that's fine to close it :)
>
> I may experiment with doas in a guix channel instead.

Note that me closing this issue was not against having 'doas' in Guix
(you are welcome to contribute a package for it if you like), it was
against offering 'doas' equivalents to 'sudo' in our documentation.

Thanks,

Maxim

Message #31 received at 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, 52897-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#52897: [PATCH] doc: Add instructions on upgrading the build
 daemon with doas.
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 23:53:19 -0500

On Fri, 08 Jul 2022 21:36:33 -0400 Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Note that me closing this issue was not against having 'doas' in Guix
> (you are welcome to contribute a package for it if you like), it was
> against offering 'doas' equivalents to 'sudo' in our documentation.

Hi Maxim,

doas is already packaged.

The program is called opendoas.

`guix show opendoas`

But, yes, I understood not including it in the documentation. That's fine.

It might be nice to have a service in the future that allows a user to switch between sudo and doas.

I haven't gotten around to that yet.

all best,

jgart

Previous Next

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