Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Nov 2022 15:04:06 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 03 11:04:06 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49940 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oqblG-0002kp-Fx
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2022 11:04:06 -0400
Received: from mail-qv1-f48.google.com ([209.85.219.48]:44689)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1oqblE-0002kI-1Z
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2022 11:04:05 -0400
Received: by mail-qv1-f48.google.com with SMTP id n18so1276810qvt.11
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 03 Nov 2022 08:04:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id
:in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=X+4YnG2+UDT47Epvrt5Qqhr5WTV1AF9joPsxKTL0BTU=;
b=p8HCo40KT9DVXQXs6SbF9//DGqaxj0GJ5EnoPE7xYg5FhMIMjOVbY+UQABLtSSfz1W
nFKoC4SkoZ5Q9LVvpBvaippnAMgeug0/Cv8yqVJUj/XmI4As6QELjnKcXr0DKNvcnRQ/
Lpyzv033cGkwOYAbSKgDpNhKcEKREaT3EnGn9qQr3mCj90IbaDnOYG2f9p8vOSyDWUkc
vfVIMF0dUK7aDYvB+mLmtOwP4OcxoCG8vdWae84CDrgw6KdHX/L7EmkHJpzejVPcODRL
HbECyRGSyL6f1b7E8Glwi1LWsYRETBLMfyqsRY7oEB8Ow0z+n6yRjEJC1Mpxx1I03OGO
Q7DA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id
:in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=X+4YnG2+UDT47Epvrt5Qqhr5WTV1AF9joPsxKTL0BTU=;
b=Dtwmu3HXUWTl5KMgtZuoGAyQIDYsepQwJs0hcSslOeJ9Y0YZwgFRh0wWEUBDlDUchM
F+uMc/4sDYE+s+a3LD98ZCHsBR/YrIv605pHI7cm9403BdLv1PzGuNHldsFOLK7jozpc
i7X/ZI5gRlEbhragCLE1yMTJgSrfyEYBbpxbydkx0EPN51NfYMOu2mgleu9bt4qcorND
bqcO8vUvOpR4CsEKszR390j/8z+4O9SDg1AZdJ5DpiRYxF97jf9L/3iFWBY3Rlbw5HrR
DR37O6sjkoNLYqAYiAnc/me3zKuWuGsExKbaXqpgGbjqhC8z3UnA7cMJkFn3KZEZPKlS
pF3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0mhCzF9h0b0qyxHn/+nJdfnGBJfdA5KKduLeZOUeeXlRKhhXgh
yBZs0LB8CWv8J1RJTkpzd7D4nji2Igk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6Te3SzteIZ0sqSSbZBQbkxGqHkp4vkAL5m6f5jDZVaTp3VYHDlYm25rUZ2tLhdTbl8upamuw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5681:b0:4bb:fbc0:4d9 with SMTP id
lm1-20020a056214568100b004bbfbc004d9mr18704616qvb.10.1667487838273;
Thu, 03 Nov 2022 08:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hurd (dsl-159-188.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.159.188])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
f11-20020ac8068b000000b0039cba52974fsm622995qth.94.2022.11.03.08.03.57
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 03 Nov 2022 08:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
<874jvhh92c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx>
<8735b1e4ri.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 11:03:56 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8735b1e4ri.fsf@HIDDEN> (zimoun's message of "Wed, 02 Nov 2022
16:48:49 +0100")
Message-ID: <87sfj0axlv.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>,
58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Simon,
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes:
[...]
> Euh, why is it going against the spirit of the naming rules? All Guile
> packages are prefixed by =E2=80=99guile-=E2=80=99, as Haskell by =E2=80=
=99ghc-=E2=80=99, as R by =E2=80=99r-=E2=80=99,
> etc.
>
> And for instance, the package =E2=80=99python-nose=E2=80=99 provides =E2=
=80=99bin/nosetests=E2=80=99.
> Idem for =E2=80=99python-pylint=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=99bin/pylint=E2=80=99=
; for the two I quickly found.
Referring to info '(guix) Package Naming', that doesn't seem to be a
written rule; my rule of thumb here would be: if something exists to be
used exclusively as a command, drop the language-specific prefix. If it
is a library or both a library and a command, keep the prefix. In
doubt, keep the prefix.
So supposing 'git' was implemented in Python, it'd still be called
'git', not 'python-git'. pylint could/should probably be named
"pylint", but perhaps it's also usable as a Python library, I haven't
checked.
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2022 15:49:49 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 02 11:49:49 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47001 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oqFzw-0002BC-UJ
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:49:49 -0400
Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com ([209.85.221.42]:36815)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1oqFzv-0002Aw-CD
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:49:47 -0400
Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id j15so25176968wrq.3
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=EIvm85RcfVfX5IkYUaDQg8U/KBgHE0GLalaAM6QDx+I=;
b=DuCZ7daHpnqB2ZSs86apzu9ytIYC1u52LgCR1XBA3JIUIsMrE7biGuwmJpSu2t++VE
udOmB+Q1gvqyXE9mzX9eWICP3mADumMw+jA8YOK1iQGEFKl+9DH5acssYveLsh2aTu9N
8yPDSoQiQLBPwtp+5uJzL6EBx4b/C9DHLzPo1+3TMmMmUwBJ6QIOqOnPIeBzuiKyWD+i
HjwIYODpn0Q8dinhPk2i5PplSthogMMwZWwcJqrAx+v5PiLblWMjQGO3FNuBY8El7PBi
ttn1XOuklmxWNstYP1j5OVRVpmwSx1KLt3EqHHsReZLOa8w44fEryZs0HzI2EgXhvMvA
BRdQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc
:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=EIvm85RcfVfX5IkYUaDQg8U/KBgHE0GLalaAM6QDx+I=;
b=eP7nq/Y0tkqhTBqZRq/jj74f2bVq6MH52eitvzxxSW6P4TfHFT6JrRXGEbhsob0MBt
DpEC5JWKmqHxqNeXsJMLep172L4oklY9FwpJdUOAzfHZ1inG/i0eIRdYBE1kIrk7tdNi
tfFDgWIv8V9tlIsKMvzOvKEeLj4sT8o6nwc5fcmktzuWD5nCX9YVZg6MDD4nwjCBCUc+
EFc1LVfdmuvNIzqbgGy2vKnRch4M8pNYtdSn/xxvRzM07o0wM2pS8KAmjuKHbH6Rj/6o
ETKkXtCnv4yLpZ9rZjODDQPTLz+O3rhv3h7nRF73En//6APW2IJIe+DKlcyymxujTzJc
QLgA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1/LHYl9krRyC80uIL+urxwcosv3QnVlOPC2ABj6vNADkCLGuv2
iGxucyyc4R59ipKmlIpwq6A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7+RCjAQ4Q5/3LbJo38pynmQyDoXvrx8HWlxEADiaZObPhTZe4EqoGd5OlvWgQxZpFFV4+mtw==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:598d:0:b0:236:8ef5:867d with SMTP id
n13-20020a5d598d000000b002368ef5867dmr15315152wri.162.1667404181365;
Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
j7-20020a05600c190700b003b477532e66sm3414582wmq.2.2022.11.02.08.49.40
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
In-Reply-To: <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
<874jvhh92c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 16:48:49 +0100
Message-ID: <8735b1e4ri.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Tobias,
On mer., 02 nov. 2022 at 14:19, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via =
<guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
> Thanks for the clarifications! I hope you don't feel like you=20
> were dragged into a discussion against your will. If so, I really=20
> do apologise.
>
> I think all intentions here were the opposite: to make sure that=20
> even a =E2=80=98weak=E2=80=99 opinion was properly considered. It might =
turn out=20
> to be more robust than the =E2=80=98strong=E2=80=99 ones ;-) That's one =
of Guix's=20
> strengths IMO.
For sure. :-)
Well, we agree that many people are confused by
1. which version of Guix they are running,
2. the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 which time to time is installe=
d with a
wrong understanding about what it is.
And we agree that the patch is a way to address that. We also agree
that raising a message when running =E2=80=9Cguix install guix=E2=80=9D (wh=
atever the
profile) is an appropriate mean to address the issue.
Where we disagree is only if the message must be an error stopping any
other actions or if the message must be a warning =E2=80=93 letting people =
shoot
in their foot if they really want to, fully being aware that they could
be burnt.
Yours arguments are not convincing me that an error is adequate because
I am raising corner cases (e.g., guix as a Guile library). And you are
not convinced by my arguments, pointing that are not worth the
exception.
Well, let agree that we disagree and move forward. :-) I rally to the
proposal about put an error. At worse, there is many workarounds for
people really wanting the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 in some prof=
ile. :-)
Just other minor comments =E2=80=93 because now I am dragged into a discuss=
ion
against my will ;-) =E2=80=93 so let keep my opinion as clear as I am able =
to.
> zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>> Therefore, why do we provide the =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 package in the f=
irst=20
>> place?
>
> That =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=80=99 is an error does *not* imply tha=
t the=20
> mere existence of the =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 package is an error. I thin=
k we can=20
> keep those separate.
We agree that =E2=80=9Cguix install guix=E2=80=9D is most of the time an er=
ror and an
user=E2=80=99s misunderstanding. We want address the confusion and one par=
t of
the confusion is from the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99. Therefore,=
it appears
to me a question: why do we provide the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=
=99 in the
first place?
This is a honest question. Maybe this patch is not addressing at the
correct level the source of the confusion. And maybe the fix should be
at another level.
Aside some corner cases as described elsewhere (guix as a Guile
library), why do we need to provide a package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99?=
In order to
allow,
guix shell -D guix
for feeding a development environment for Guix. Something else?
Somehow, my point is not to imply that the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=
=80=99 is an
error but instead to think if we really need this package named =E2=80=99gu=
ix=E2=80=99.
>> Well, maybe instead the package =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99, it should be ren=
amed
>> =E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=99guile-libguix=E2=80=99.
>
> That would be going against the spirit of our own naming rules,=20
> unless you mean that it should be a =E2=80=98library-only=E2=80=99 varian=
t that=20
> lacks /bin/guix.
Euh, why is it going against the spirit of the naming rules? All Guile
packages are prefixed by =E2=80=99guile-=E2=80=99, as Haskell by =E2=80=99g=
hc-=E2=80=99, as R by =E2=80=99r-=E2=80=99,
etc.
And for instance, the package =E2=80=99python-nose=E2=80=99 provides =E2=80=
=99bin/nosetests=E2=80=99.
Idem for =E2=80=99python-pylint=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=99bin/pylint=E2=80=99; =
for the two I quickly found.
> Now *that* I do find mildly confusing=E2=80=94but only because it's=20
> starting to get complex :-) Do we then put /bin/guix in=20
> =E2=80=98guix-libguix:bin=E2=80=99? Or a second package? Etc.
Here, I am confused. :-) Aside that =E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 would be a=
perfectly
fine name, I miss the logic: on one hand a willing to error because
=E2=80=99bin/guix=E2=80=99 and on the other hand trying to define various o=
utputs to
keep such =E2=80=99bin/guix=E2=80=99.
Or I miss some humour behind.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2022 14:05:05 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 02 10:05:05 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46888 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oqEMb-0005p3-19
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 10:05:05 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([80.241.217.52]:49706)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1oqEMY-0005oX-Rd
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 10:05:04 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=BAtHql4G6OMXQ
EmXbgFqSTmDrluAcnSlwOgD9vj7mmQ=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to:
from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=RmFvHROwt2/KgSJeepVr+8mctc/UccVPNYF+gr
ASFKhto1+q3aFa8AzQRoynrcmg4oHxb4jrZk3StuvZ0fBFMFquWyZmBYPD8XR/MD0aa8YJ
o3xlxCslLri31ZQFYPX4qU3puUSGfdQPgh1xORW60D6QubIhzgCU1ZU1EEJ95IwsIhdhlR
SKLmMRx4lCAnK+JpN+QjNgnrGri5BepVBLjvnzxnGnCrn5xOEUWxn5LzyEeMaE+E+yXRLe
CTApZcwrJgFIQwhJ/OO+JTGq5zG+Es+9Ug0A3IRJRPWxTIlGcLUaO9cJXzp4UbDhKj0dU5
0Z8xcYGqBEQGDqQVNeA5zxeQ==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 3a401e02
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Wed, 2 Nov 2022 14:04:52 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
<874jvhh92c.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 14:19:02 +0100
In-reply-to: <874jvhh92c.fsf@HIDDEN>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Heyo,
Thanks for the clarifications! I hope you don't feel like you=20
were dragged into a discussion against your will. If so, I really=20
do apologise.
I think all intentions here were the opposite: to make sure that=20
even a =E2=80=98weak=E2=80=99 opinion was properly considered. It might tu=
rn out=20
to be more robust than the =E2=80=98strong=E2=80=99 ones ;-) That's one of=
Guix's=20
strengths IMO.
I'll not ask further questions below.
zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> Therefore, why do we provide the =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 package in the fi=
rst=20
> place?
That =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=80=99 is an error does *not* imply that =
the=20
mere existence of the =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 package is an error. I think =
we can=20
keep those separate.
>> How does one continue to use guix *as a package manager*,=20
>> having=20
>> now silently broken =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99?
>
> There is a confusion here, maybe? Guix is also a Guile library=20
> and that
> library is designed around package management.
Right. My problem is: I don't understand what's confusing about=20
that fact, so it's hard to communicate effectively about what I=20
don't see=E2=80=A6
> Well, maybe instead the package =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99, it should be rena=
med
> =E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=99guile-libguix=E2=80=99.
That would be going against the spirit of our own naming rules,=20
unless you mean that it should be a =E2=80=98library-only=E2=80=99 variant =
that=20
lacks /bin/guix.
Now *that* I do find mildly confusing=E2=80=94but only because it's=20
starting to get complex :-) Do we then put /bin/guix in=20
=E2=80=98guix-libguix:bin=E2=80=99? Or a second package? Etc.
So I'd rather keep =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 available as =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=
=99.
> Personally, I do not consider ~/.guix-profile more special.
Nor do I. I agree that =E2=80=98-p ~/.guix-profile=E2=80=99 shouldn't be m=
agical,=20
or I would have suggested an approach different from ('s from the=20
start.
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY2J5CQ0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15TYkBAKUN83jRrDtxln03pJDGqpKrcd8mil+P0hfinwd7
mybUAQD2+aC9cd8MsnaJmZcYi6nqja5vzLG7jJstexSNPzAfCw==
=hTUH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2022 13:06:09 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 02 09:06:09 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45148 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oqDRZ-0003tA-C4
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 09:06:09 -0400
Received: from mail-wr1-f47.google.com ([209.85.221.47]:45885)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1oqDRW-0003sH-Ca
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 09:06:06 -0400
Received: by mail-wr1-f47.google.com with SMTP id y16so24422358wrt.12
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 06:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=WYPOFPCTEXfIX+LRQIrSht0nfswLqtRyaMvdVydXUkY=;
b=ToGKO5QHyNBDSojhwBlShuR4RnMwz76TdMdxjEwamwvkN11Vu0r8eHC5r6TboXzajr
ML6CLnQluHGV1Jbgl3Vf9vZmk5ymkYg/cyvO9+8HsTMwdtONIqHWkDczn1NqdGlNgwGS
btWe5Go6ctsVT8WDzE6A2zvPfnTPjgLo82SYVFhdYbLWqgSfxFjw93RQpBsUodvg/Xtz
UP9Ggw6szaIdmDlK7eRilkCbOoNIz/cXl6ZJnJ3Cnw5QeLluYhqEFsES/0SrXUlMC3zB
iATld7VI8uTvxAohRZ9WIYCk2PQ6hZBWhzW1uydZ0IdAEd6+gmtokwtZOgSXXwSZzlyR
nmQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc
:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=WYPOFPCTEXfIX+LRQIrSht0nfswLqtRyaMvdVydXUkY=;
b=EM7j2ETaaIhUPirxmQtEPSo7YZeTEp9M5wDTDJYhvg4L6W41Xllfb9+/YU5KSx2jTI
aR44tQ2uH/cHrw+iVaIMytlcF3Ac97JU6BD5kEKsGsfwkgsoeWebW1dN6bM22XhZUUMi
Z+IwQrMe1LplxfexvFtioJ6WNYmJ/SYO4jcQfJlGehmhUMzc9dP6R93WfA6GWsC+ZjQr
Lu5uXlG6bLXkJPb0EvGrMboyvIkBBYJb3t7juz2tuTfq/omGGQHwDvZbgcF8xupJINTk
iQaeai3OObrl8z5vc6NPxquFFG8euRTR7tbrtDIi+3hHihDSdOOL7Xxtjm1pvXyGmApm
nVGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2QETwGs+CWAsR+kiP0R5rVyN6s7vZLbCLvqhdfnDVkWpwUZMIA
XGa9FHT/8VT+eh47RI4GtNZCTrGER+E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7MIhZLzHp7XjQEH8g18kbZQz8SggsPV8w5KUSX1qN6b3407OxkC7FpwancIw1z8GDxRMZWJQ==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:df03:0:b0:236:78cb:b6e5 with SMTP id
y3-20020adfdf03000000b0023678cbb6e5mr14795524wrl.269.1667394360669;
Wed, 02 Nov 2022 06:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
e11-20020adfe7cb000000b00236740c6e6fsm12635431wrn.100.2022.11.02.06.06.00
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 02 Nov 2022 06:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
<me@HIDDEN>, paren@HIDDEN
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
In-Reply-To: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 12:47:39 +0100
Message-ID: <874jvhh92c.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi (, Maxim and Tobias,
Well, as I said, I do not have a strong opinion. If 3 of you think an
error is better than a warning, then I rally to the proposal.
Minor comments about yours. :-)
On ven., 28 oct. 2022 at 15:31, "\( via Guix-patches" via <guix-patches@gnu=
.org> wrote:
> What about just this?
>
> guix shell guix
>
> That's still possible.
To be precise, the correct would be:
guix time-machine -C channels.scm -- shell guix
which is=E2=80=A6 equivalent to define a profile. ;-) i.e.,
guix package -i guix -p my/dev
On ven., 28 oct. 2022 at 11:47, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>=
wrote:
> Does the benefit of fixing the Guix API used via a user profile
> installed Guix package outweigh the cons of downgrading the version of
> guix used as the user's package manager? I don't think so. By
> installing the inner 'guix' into your user profile, you are basically
> downgrading its version compared to the one you used to install it.
> That's a pretty confusing thing to happen for most users.
I agree. However, to me, it is a warning (or a hint) =E2=80=93 =C2=ABhey y=
ou are
probably doing something wrong=C2=BB =E2=80=93 and not an error =E2=80=93 =
=C2=ABwe provide you
something but no, not this way=C2=BB.
Therefore, why do we provide the =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 package in the firs=
t place?
(BTW, I think the correct way to use Guix as a library is to use it via
GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH as pioneered by gwl and followed by
guix-modules. :-))
On ven., 28 oct. 2022 at 18:20, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via =
<guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
> How does one continue to use guix *as a package manager*, having=20
> now silently broken =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99?
There is a confusion here, maybe? Guix is also a Guile library and that
library is designed around package management.
Well, maybe instead the package =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99, it should be renamed
=E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=99guile-libguix=E2=80=99.
On ven., 28 oct. 2022 at 19:01, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via =
<guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
> Would this be address by refusing only to =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=
=80=99=20
> without an explicit --profile argument? This would eliminate 99%=20
> of unintentional footguns. We could still warn.
Personally, I do not consider ~/.guix-profile more special. But maybe,
it would help to address the newcomer=E2=80=99s confusion.
Again, I think a strong warning is better than a hard error but I do not
have a strong opinion.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 17:02:10 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 13:02:10 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34184 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooSkE-0006vD-99
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:10 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([80.241.217.52]:43782)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSkA-0006v3-Vu
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=k0E+2kYuH8Qrr
H6bUwnfSboQPV0cfJefJyWPQ3khODw=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:from:
references; d=tobias.gr; b=EAS67QKFpMhx4PklfPRQKmc3JiVkAZQIOHBMlHaqWtO
tH+6K0+Xp7P8aXcEI6f59Bh/SCuf1p5UyYHuU4tx1t7dvAWvlA+3AiaMRCS2H7Qd1Opg8n
8J+QmcVhC/6WO3exzwBvTDFjgGeb1ymwatjGqHlu1s26KtVuXMcGLLu8TrZ7Qdjq4GJdk+
HE7oQ0bMVVKeo0or/4HNqrwQALfnPL6jeJTcKu2CaJfk/Vz8y3UxJIPnDqWqVDhw54NkC6
Hky0IsQEdRZ1MrPCNXsDCIOnSFRtuB76oeqVeBMi1GS8Vuk3oxT+zysEBYYDtvPxqUum0P
KzwtALnIFvsFvb1O3iQ==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 97f0c300
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 17:01:57 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 19:01:30 +0200
In-reply-to: <87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <87mt9fzxri.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via 写道： >> For
instance, if an user packs their Guile application using >> some >> other
>> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for >> develop [...]
Content analysis details: (1.2 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
1.2 MISSING_HEADERS Missing To: header
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: paren@HIDDEN, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN,
maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>> For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using=20
>> some
>> other
>> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for=20
>> developing, it
>> becomes not possible to just locally create a profile.
>
> Why not?
Would this be address by refusing only to =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=80=
=99=20
without an explicit --profile argument? This would eliminate 99%=20
of unintentional footguns. We could still warn.
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY1wLUQ0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15KYkA/iFEORnCT2kxYf6z4ChHeQ/dFdCNMzWKguhfJOWY
AWlCAQCICqzphp0HTivVfh6p2ZnjxxyUoyzOwHTOn1dWp+WXDA==
=uvVU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 17:02:18 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 13:02:18 2022 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34188 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ooSkM-0006vY-KN for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:18 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:43316) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSkH-0006vM-0U for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSkE-0008Pd-MI for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:11 -0400 Received: from tobias.gr ([2a02:c205:2020:6054::1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSkC-0007js-H6 for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 13:02:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=k0E+2kYuH8Qrr H6bUwnfSboQPV0cfJefJyWPQ3khODw=; h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:from: references; d=tobias.gr; b=EAS67QKFpMhx4PklfPRQKmc3JiVkAZQIOHBMlHaqWtO tH+6K0+Xp7P8aXcEI6f59Bh/SCuf1p5UyYHuU4tx1t7dvAWvlA+3AiaMRCS2H7Qd1Opg8n 8J+QmcVhC/6WO3exzwBvTDFjgGeb1ymwatjGqHlu1s26KtVuXMcGLLu8TrZ7Qdjq4GJdk+ HE7oQ0bMVVKeo0or/4HNqrwQALfnPL6jeJTcKu2CaJfk/Vz8y3UxJIPnDqWqVDhw54NkC6 Hky0IsQEdRZ1MrPCNXsDCIOnSFRtuB76oeqVeBMi1GS8Vuk3oxT+zysEBYYDtvPxqUum0P KzwtALnIFvsFvb1O3iQ== Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 97f0c300 (TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO); Fri, 28 Oct 2022 17:01:57 +0000 (UTC) References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN> <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx> From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package. Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 19:01:30 +0200 In-reply-to: <87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx> BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default; Message-ID: <87mt9fzxri.fsf@nckx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:c205:2020:6054::1; envelope-from=me@HIDDEN; helo=tobias.gr X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: paren@HIDDEN, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN, maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >> For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using=20 >> some >> other >> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for=20 >> developing, it >> becomes not possible to just locally create a profile. > > Why not? Would this be address by refusing only to =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=80= =99=20 without an explicit --profile argument? This would eliminate 99%=20 of unintentional footguns. We could still warn. Kind regards, T G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY1wLUQ0cbWVAdG9iaWFz LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15KYkA/iFEORnCT2kxYf6z4ChHeQ/dFdCNMzWKguhfJOWY AWlCAQCICqzphp0HTivVfh6p2ZnjxxyUoyzOwHTOn1dWp+WXDA== =uvVU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 16:24:51 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 12:24:51 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34151 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooSA7-0005xb-5M
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:51 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([80.241.217.52]:38362)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSA1-0005xO-6U
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:49 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=mKTmU/m1+ZmxF
d6MWCWrYiwSb8nOAJq8CmSpDkHvyUI=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to:
from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=Z9g0/sO5XhLvsfqr3LBMPMj00ev1LxbQ3wNKhw
XS/0apSc6x0YGpUbVUjUwox6LGSiUm35UpfpyqH2WjxjvfylIbc9wYEzsXSmHtcH0HjIGc
xZvnZFlvPMS2cAN1licLOhKf6w2wTIcTE6sEOsi+HHFikUB0wTzB+HbTdy6BpRtWDmA0PF
XLyY031GttcSIO8EOW19MjFbHfDcIaZpaqx6Vq/juL8Fm9KFzwQT6Zm5JvnX2r6e9pCQ3k
8TULa+sQYtUZyOqQrRGfNufqciIXiovymJl247jYYKqwQYMgFqJV1lI4DamyRLiCa4VToV
o/bSI0U+M6Y3WM8oSdr/etcQ==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 6bc2efeb
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:24:35 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 18:20:06 +0200
In-reply-to: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Heyo,
zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> Not necessary or I am missing something. For instance, you want=20
> to
> build some Guile application relying on the Guix library;=20
> similarly as
> you have, say, guile-commonmark or any other Guile packages.
Sure.
> Yes, it is possible to do without installing the package guix=20
> but it is
> not handy. Aside, it is not always clear which revision of the=20
> API is
> available when the package guix fixes it.
OK. But could you explain more clearly how
$ guix install guix
is involved, and how it is =E2=80=98handy=E2=80=99?
How does one continue to use guix *as a package manager*, having=20
now silently broken =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99?
> For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using=20
> some other
> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for developing,=20
> it
> becomes not possible to just locally create a profile.
Why not?
> But maybe I am missing something.
Or we are!
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY1wCjw0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW150YIA/iNxJlHaHHAHrFvSEtPDlTv9ack2TDRgBVOkyFVh
zzmJAP0dSxgBYgXgwbwAwtaL/a1tL7W5kNFSKQ4dYUlXdgrmDQ==
=DNyT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 16:24:59 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 12:24:59 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34154 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooSAE-0005xw-Fe
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:58 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:58828)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSA7-0005xc-IW
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:53 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSA7-0006v8-5y
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:51 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([2a02:c205:2020:6054::1])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1ooSA5-0002GY-37
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 12:24:50 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=mKTmU/m1+ZmxF
d6MWCWrYiwSb8nOAJq8CmSpDkHvyUI=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to:
from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=Z9g0/sO5XhLvsfqr3LBMPMj00ev1LxbQ3wNKhw
XS/0apSc6x0YGpUbVUjUwox6LGSiUm35UpfpyqH2WjxjvfylIbc9wYEzsXSmHtcH0HjIGc
xZvnZFlvPMS2cAN1licLOhKf6w2wTIcTE6sEOsi+HHFikUB0wTzB+HbTdy6BpRtWDmA0PF
XLyY031GttcSIO8EOW19MjFbHfDcIaZpaqx6Vq/juL8Fm9KFzwQT6Zm5JvnX2r6e9pCQ3k
8TULa+sQYtUZyOqQrRGfNufqciIXiovymJl247jYYKqwQYMgFqJV1lI4DamyRLiCa4VToV
o/bSI0U+M6Y3WM8oSdr/etcQ==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 6bc2efeb
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:24:35 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 18:20:06 +0200
In-reply-to: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <87r0yrzzht.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:c205:2020:6054::1; envelope-from=me@HIDDEN;
helo=tobias.gr
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Heyo,
zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> Not necessary or I am missing something. For instance, you want=20
> to
> build some Guile application relying on the Guix library;=20
> similarly as
> you have, say, guile-commonmark or any other Guile packages.
Sure.
> Yes, it is possible to do without installing the package guix=20
> but it is
> not handy. Aside, it is not always clear which revision of the=20
> API is
> available when the package guix fixes it.
OK. But could you explain more clearly how
$ guix install guix
is involved, and how it is =E2=80=98handy=E2=80=99?
How does one continue to use guix *as a package manager*, having=20
now silently broken =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99?
> For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using=20
> some other
> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for developing,=20
> it
> becomes not possible to just locally create a profile.
Why not?
> But maybe I am missing something.
Or we are!
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY1wCjw0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW150YIA/iNxJlHaHHAHrFvSEtPDlTv9ack2TDRgBVOkyFVh
zzmJAP0dSxgBYgXgwbwAwtaL/a1tL7W5kNFSKQ4dYUlXdgrmDQ==
=DNyT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 15:47:44 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 11:47:44 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34101 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooRaB-00051A-P6
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:47:44 -0400
Received: from mail-qv1-f49.google.com ([209.85.219.49]:45630)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1ooRa6-00050R-Pg
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:47:42 -0400
Received: by mail-qv1-f49.google.com with SMTP id j6so4290168qvn.12
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9c0vaPWJdBKehpCwXF7FmSn7XqMBVCaou5T2QLuFIh4=;
b=bcWFlRYqnDl5L5h2mXgpfursuDWSk+bGD8fkPnVjLlzjzi35Aue51G7m9IcVGq3MaE
hTODfrdcGLwknhFrQNLJKbR4g395Ip+wLBhwSUxTeT2qy8pjl0IAB89Su4Klhaw+X2PD
TL8o9SihZDN+gZ/OoKGiA1CVoq6ne47QEb4uyHhDnPtRbaHzUvVNKvyg4Pm1xsc0bnv6
LT/OiLPV9VJO19aGunFJbAnpbEHqQvag1U3DntX0oEzBuDrDdJGoGd3gk0oSrm0Z2jdW
l/mpYgs+ioKpjOlwL4vl/09ZShXRBU30ULygE2uIogti2uuofN/LUFR5Fq7qAM+Ij3fL
uUSA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9c0vaPWJdBKehpCwXF7FmSn7XqMBVCaou5T2QLuFIh4=;
b=lX44T4PX6+Ngx+42aYZKUD0ND8Iud6DN0r44if/Am3LjajbjsIm9BXaL5aQcTi4P5a
CwMNM9kTbgeQbKLN5BGaF/sCJMLRoAPWjjuOk0svGcldCchkCH8OuCSAH3lB46BtpIl7
E9oXYTncNNWCXiEn4PiFNNRyrYuHmZAbDk6WX8G4e1IYRhOAdH6ahbRim60V+Cv/Vova
HOPNcymq6xquLq/sJoZtEc+jFAYucH8clIWC0QSyT9gJxVekRvJshPMDi+YekUSHypdh
7X3yL0YOwdLXQf1NbeyUgfPN9yj2TnQhbXcgXzCvpGfI1jKiViawi2eXs4ex9YY6X+4y
N6Yg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3nEHshoqANZVlVidVrPBwlzaDK+at4WB7FVIH1ZoYBkl9uBz44
UN03JlLvVLUQf1DJWktyG4I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4aYRIUH1YjAKC97LJo2LZ9B4Iarwi6dyx047KHWAEAgRSp6YzrUND4SjeFI24d8z/54hF/0Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:242a:b0:4b9:98bf:92d2 with SMTP id
gy10-20020a056214242a00b004b998bf92d2mr39638qvb.89.1666972053214;
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hurd (dsl-152-179.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.152.179])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
v12-20020a05620a440c00b006eed47a1a1esm3147940qkp.134.2022.10.28.08.47.32
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:47:31 -0400
In-Reply-To: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN> (zimoun's message of "Fri, 28 Oct 2022
09:44:49 +0200")
Message-ID: <87k04keyr0.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>,
58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Simon,
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 16:04, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>>>> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
>>>
>>> Instead of an error, I would prefer a warning. Because, sometimes it is
>>> useful to have this Guix library. :-)
>>
>> The Guix API would be available without having to 'guix install guix' in
>> the first place, no?
>
> Not necessary or I am missing something. For instance, you want to
> build some Guile application relying on the Guix library; similarly as
> you have, say, guile-commonmark or any other Guile packages.
>
> Yes, it is possible to do without installing the package guix but it is
> not handy. Aside, it is not always clear which revision of the API is
> available when the package guix fixes it.
>
> For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using some other
> Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for developing, it
> becomes not possible to just locally create a profile.
>
> Well, I do not have a strong opinion on that, for what it is worth, I
> would prefer a strong warning instead of an hard error. But maybe I am
> missing something.
Does the benefit of fixing the Guix API used via a user profile
installed Guix package outweigh the cons of downgrading the version of
guix used as the user's package manager? I don't think so. By
installing the inner 'guix' into your user profile, you are basically
downgrading its version compared to the one you used to install it.
That's a pretty confusing thing to happen for most users.
As paren suggested, I think it's best to enter a dedicated 'guix shell'
profile with Guix when developing with the Guix API, else use the 'guix
repl' ability to run scripts.
It may be slightly inconvenient, but it's better than allowing Guix to
be silently downgraded upon unsuspecting users, in my opinion.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 14:42:41 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 10:42:41 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34058 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooQZF-0003PM-F4
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 10:42:41 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:40862)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1ooQZD-0003PD-O7
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 10:42:40 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B854EA1A;
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:42:38 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id RFAR6eOlX4CE; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:42:37 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666967481; bh=ZCEgyFgcDeyPn9JT8QceFMV8VIgu9k+8pDHnJOjGi6I=;
h=Date:Cc:Subject:From:To:References:In-Reply-To;
b=FqSuitLQC9cwHN5xYEk6fvlupHOoWbxReC7i8mp9s7zyMdzpnx4gerWaxoGJgP7wG
VZiRnYeoMwzKoHkIcFYUnbL6+RFXp9GLDmcDegsO9/Si7AZWsv5pSEEjGg8OygbwFt
0CzVF8D++qYBhnm+pee6IBqUBaPmdsqjwioHgpBBuek7fntVoTpZkIEm64jR5qFHM5
vQ+aqxpJMBya0nXmih4YBQzVU7PMzmnQOSrCb1/TcNLu3yzjutqpBHIkyeK1EfI5VL
Q5rFT8lbIHWvM6E+IkWEfvcrvGPcdefyrXmlLC7dusM/LoIEZQk14HmYsxO5ECGtWP
j+3DGtD18HJ2w==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 15:31:19 +0100
Message-Id: <CNXMNKC5047E.45IIR8D2HMB4@guix-framework>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
To: "zimoun" <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, "Maxim Cournoyer"
<maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Fri Oct 28, 2022 at 8:44 AM BST,
zimoun wrote: > Not necessary
or I am missing something. For instance,
you want to > build some Guile application
relying on the Guix library; similarly as > you ha [...]
Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
On Fri Oct 28, 2022 at 8:44 AM BST, zimoun wrote:
> Not necessary or I am missing something. For instance, you want to
> build some Guile application relying on the Guix library; similarly as
> you have, say, guile-commonmark or any other Guile packages.
What about just this?
guix shell guix
That's still possible.
-- (
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2022 08:47:42 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 28 04:47:41 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60347 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ooL1h-00024S-Bv
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 04:47:41 -0400
Received: from mail-wm1-f51.google.com ([209.85.128.51]:50952)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1ooL1b-00023D-GH
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 04:47:36 -0400
Received: by mail-wm1-f51.google.com with SMTP id y10so2641130wma.0
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:47:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=psXp17Vk3gIkuOIWqwYtIGV25Ovz/MhhimHapZGmOO0=;
b=TMTMKV99JNqYEAeTa2tpfYZP8WgMHGh0N/Zm7yADzyJD/31U6iPh6/AtIq5131fhfL
9HKtckz1fSSYMYOK/Zudq2GjViecFOjPO+Cvhi6DMrLfurJeWt5S1nbwk2t/q/B/dMtT
or8EQgXRV4I8mEpPuH+C1wzietaW8VEP7u4IRZnpOCtB3eUMKYDLYhucRHB2D3iH9ToP
7dn0ijDu1UmxSIrJ+kfo2kiku+giovXbL3wCbyiME/tQ6rn8Ts8BeoNEB1ktYhMXm6j9
7mHcosmbzvuvrbQuOtSysPWyLdJgfngZAe5uHTwkxiOPPGefCijw/+bA1XPNg5vZV72d
S9lQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=psXp17Vk3gIkuOIWqwYtIGV25Ovz/MhhimHapZGmOO0=;
b=nKETTd1vb24FhBjpZFMYfiFcaR5q8+qNRjOjrNO/6fngi+n/HqFiI+8f/PHtlexDgr
OH9ZDjCdKFVrI78j43sQC3tlf1gPNL2M2YB7J00nPwsWgapJSAuzADh8+1pfOgeluoZX
qk0kCFrx152U1hGAFmIBF/qdSOaXe6oRzJJabJKW7X6t7/PwrsSSiIlu7bDcZi0MD7nr
HBTgvcfyxoPbSubN54UBSSV82jT64PzE1NdgTYMwHqj4g69PLgRA871D5BLUyddDjeTT
/aQ5ewGaMbTi3B+DoSvMbi3Gbf4/H0fsnDhrSKEUVhqmwBmSwHi/Sarx+o6u7inGraLX
6zHQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0S+nvfci3jLaCorFIpLcZkY1zVleN8S6C9EONK1teUqxzdQLdz
qGiIObL9qYiGP7PGX6brnpnxWVzG74g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5R5gJP6JqOaDWZLMyNjAw1nxlySMSp+wRhai9LP49z0SZR7pbmrMMNqnLBTWAVI6Im17uIqg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:184d:b0:22f:4ef4:47a7 with SMTP id
c13-20020a056000184d00b0022f4ef447a7mr34419118wri.563.1666946849817;
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ba24-20020a0560001c1800b0022e57e66824sm4080622wrb.99.2022.10.28.01.47.29
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation
of the guix package.
In-Reply-To: <87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:44:49 +0200
Message-ID: <86a65g8k9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Maxim,
On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 16:04, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> wrote:
>>> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
>>
>> Instead of an error, I would prefer a warning. Because, sometimes it is
>> useful to have this Guix library. :-)
>
> The Guix API would be available without having to 'guix install guix' in
> the first place, no?
Not necessary or I am missing something. For instance, you want to
build some Guile application relying on the Guix library; similarly as
you have, say, guile-commonmark or any other Guile packages.
Yes, it is possible to do without installing the package guix but it is
not handy. Aside, it is not always clear which revision of the API is
available when the package guix fixes it.
For instance, if an user packs their Guile application using some other
Guile libraries including the Guix library, then for developing, it
becomes not possible to just locally create a profile.
Well, I do not have a strong opinion on that, for what it is worth, I
would prefer a strong warning instead of an hard error. But maybe I am
missing something.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2022 20:11:21 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 27 16:11:21 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59447 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oo9Dl-0001Ws-1U
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:11:21 -0400
Received: from mail-qt1-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:33351)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1oo9Di-0001We-Gy
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:11:19 -0400
Received: by mail-qt1-f174.google.com with SMTP id cr19so2124476qtb.0
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id
:in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=iWPiM43mj6cxWBAfMiSXBLIiE9IXXnxp8cWkUjgES60=;
b=JeiXGyx3KuLJIvt2ie03KnG86T9EKKoj+mlpFb/SOlyM29XhUXBf1AJ6S+aaftF4ct
jrkv/X6td8k+nreOoMDZkn+SJwCTdtkz5/W7kFURuSPjitOSuo/a6wj27v1ihWFrlLmq
K/uUPIY7CIMyz440ib97G2B4CRz8ivVWfbpc8pJrOrlsJugRX7kXuLK/94Q/iS2NWtLE
wdH2KZR7utKFjLKMhUBrbF4k+a0/GCAdeEeWEexKZ5u/ttI8cnb3SQaJmDpcNehl09CE
jPM1rwjHb1b0TM6f8xDZ7+oUrJAIRTluUL2UGGTi7oabpR5k3p0Lmh23chbHyMlhfTMc
IOAQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id
:in-reply-to:date:references:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=iWPiM43mj6cxWBAfMiSXBLIiE9IXXnxp8cWkUjgES60=;
b=jePWcVp/HrJLi/ozWqoYttNzDSs9sYTSwKH0ijZ7zcrwf4l0IIoV5TZ1pNLhfPP+Pt
n3cJDgDgllK5FZQYKsrf8zF3JNI5qHN7S/E0opHVPOeVWUca45aPAodthtdURLdMflao
Om+vtDuZKw+2fB739TaCR8hjumYKrh3Nhuu2hy4Frdj8rBsyLEZZuC01y4Es5VfMVc2D
ZSx8OjNFd37Flr6IXKmxduRzSr0J5gb/9bi1XEz8gLAe/1UhSRP4P0dibe0K9QOoAS6B
3ydHztB8uxm7VvunfQAwyAsAotxqek8Flmuy1bpOMlQJzpcVeHAqciFpPg1aYn6gk7uO
HuSg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0Dek9bDOwKgm0NSzS4vz08cgjn8JViPvxWKlxAwv87GYxNdhsi
r3uA4IGaR2GBKC9fvHGA7//bYis6z7V4zQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5HWRpmsI/uujgdGSdKRPA4lYnZznLCFRvIyA8ZCTnYSDjWJD6xFJqOsG4Mrsb/qrm/u3Tuhw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:284:b0:39c:cbec:e1f0 with SMTP id
z4-20020a05622a028400b0039ccbece1f0mr42535402qtw.451.1666901472713;
Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hurd (dsl-152-179.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.152.179])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
q32-20020a05620a2a6000b006f7ee901674sm1626876qkp.2.2022.10.27.13.11.12
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#58583: [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:11:11 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> (paren@HIDDEN's
message of "Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:50:57 +0100")
Message-ID: <87eduthvs0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hello,
"(" writes: > * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*):
Fail if the > package to be installed is guix from the default channel. >
--- > guix/scripts/package.scm | 10 +++++++++- > 1 file changed, 9 in [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [209.85.160.174 listed in list.dnswl.org]
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: jpoiret.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (maxim.cournoyer[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3)
[209.85.160.174 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
Hello,
"(" <paren@HIDDEN> writes:
> * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if the
> package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
> ---
> guix/scripts/package.scm | 10 +++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/guix/scripts/package.scm b/guix/scripts/package.scm
> index 7ba2661bbb..9f023ea7b5 100644
> --- a/guix/scripts/package.scm
> +++ b/guix/scripts/package.scm
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2018 Steve Sprang <scs@HIDDEN>
> ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2022 Josselin Poiret <dev@HIDDEN>
> ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2022 Antero Mejr <antero@HIDDEN>
> +;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2022 ( <paren@HIDDEN>
> ;;;
> ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
> ;;;
> @@ -699,7 +700,14 @@ (define (store-item->manifest-entry item)
>=20=20
> (define (package->manifest-entry* package output)
> "Like 'package->manifest-entry', but attach PACKAGE provenance meta-da=
ta to
> -the resulting manifest entry."
> +the resulting manifest entry, and report an error if PACKAGE is the 'gui=
x'
> +package from the default channel."
> + (when (and (string=3D? (package-name package) "guix")
> + (string-prefix? "gnu/" (location-file
> + (package-location package))))
> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
> + (display-hint (G_ "use 'guix pull' to fetch the latest Guix revision=
"))
> + (exit 1))
> (manifest-entry-with-provenance
> (package->manifest-entry package output)))
Instead of exiting directly here, would it make sense to use
raise-exception with a compounded message and &fix-hint condition? When
working with the Guix API, I prefer to encounter exceptions rather than
errors + exit. For a recent example I used, see:
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/58812#5-lineno360.
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2022 20:04:38 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 27 16:04:38 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59442 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1oo97G-0001Mr-70
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:04:38 -0400
Received: from mail-qt1-f178.google.com ([209.85.160.178]:39851)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1oo97E-0001Me-Ln
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:04:37 -0400
Received: by mail-qt1-f178.google.com with SMTP id r19so2073868qtx.6
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=2tDHpnG+E+kbN/LgwivxV3zPKgIPQsZvfun57Z6gmME=;
b=KVEVGIRu8xrDOunyg1x0re+cf/ovDrQLtnMQbBj21ljB8WNyXWGTW5Q7f8hlHipNsC
OMJX0iMSGgAHRpwsuV7fAQolQTpEDzkksxwUXKhsa0Xt3+wXf8DhaSg/TeocCp745jR/
irjyuwbat7a/EyV09u5sbo3gD65reSARqAd1mGBus553RCVyB3T5EOSFfQ6sAjTR02uJ
4BmmdnVPEz1XbHlMkoCDrgqygTVNSGjt633zKZEzl1HWpw0UQryj6uX2XatxwwLd8sy7
+OC14ojEXibhm8OO5uQvELjxZ34ZTdONT0cXYrwHzCkFWAgBD6By43f1R1xWWSOUziEA
Hhxw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references
:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=2tDHpnG+E+kbN/LgwivxV3zPKgIPQsZvfun57Z6gmME=;
b=EvXqrAE4N8B45OiQ19IadW+pvA7x4DL6kak8CtxRUJLJBcjzYEwpNoK28rwhsBIPat
KLiIjmpg/ocP2G63hDQrVAXhWpANTFbnJLhz5NSqc4x9ZNaK8N3z6VzIh5D0kT6oRm9K
3NA/DnNAdggooVSOFhYKRym6DvMFjh9Yc0vx1G19TrbCR42sEnPYXZo+jFTN3Za5bmkC
X8WiqyWg+hDzhBqK9Zx5In6w3EHKrWlABnTU/p7XsBtvz/4IBu32oa757N0knOgJOXcI
Bfp4cjHl84CY1seDjTIXDw78JuI8JdslxYYu3dRg8+oWA2nzsM2wCMGLADeDSTh3jrR4
/CEA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3Dry6mpbfUynVliWHytiDvrtlxGibXhWYRwahqF3FfyVAHR2EO
S4gJQDTZXLbmI8NTRbACxd+bQEfAsl2XBg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7UhuAX1jMb73uypUOwgRSOS971AYo8gdP2FSlm3R7iV2BDKybrWXNELDMxUQUr20QggW/1pg==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5895:0:b0:39c:c5fa:2936 with SMTP id
t21-20020ac85895000000b0039cc5fa2936mr43323664qta.420.1666901060691;
Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:04:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hurd (dsl-152-179.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.152.179])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
r3-20020ac87ee3000000b0039442ee69c5sm1292238qtc.91.2022.10.27.13.04.20
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 27 Oct 2022 13:04:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#58583: [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:04:19 -0400
In-Reply-To: <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN> (zimoun's message of "Mon, 17 Oct 2022
20:14:09 +0200")
Message-ID: <87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi,
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Cool! Nice initiative.
>
> On lun., 17 oct. 2022 at 17:50, "\( via Guix-patches" via <guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
>
> Instead of an error, I would prefer a warning. Because, sometimes it is
> useful to have this Guix library. :-)
The Guix API would be available without having to 'guix install guix' in
the first place, no?
--
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Oct 2022 08:56:57 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 20 04:56:57 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32939 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1olRMH-0006Yu-Bk
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:57 -0400
Received: from mail-wr1-f46.google.com ([209.85.221.46]:44823)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1olRM9-0006Xr-6c
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:52 -0400
Received: by mail-wr1-f46.google.com with SMTP id v1so3987657wrt.11
for <58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=DRNFV1bN8jwznQqj9St8AOJ0znJnHuIDQIoQQascLes=;
b=Uj85S2YVhp6gFlMBf76Eu3IgJnT2eUl7YROiISFOYWpcNUlXQWaCvVFpPBcTJZbJJS
PXRdgXl/iVoRBvgzNrzNXgJBUPFQEURgFu05Qwqy3n/QAgLU4BfMDljqYZSo9ZZtfcyv
PVm73rJ9DjinkjXAfD8vEp0kDqLdFlq74mZ7bxa5/J0TCKgepLl6yLXdTgruxeTkkfPp
986JJAWUQZChl5YPalVys8JFDcw732g49o2IjmZW0RADIiG6FUi/+VhFyaKyT/B/cBzr
loSsdV9cR2K3pRepOJwr/PWaxMTD2rH2gnJSbN576Hq5CIZcD6ZNN734xEWR8NEeTu98
38Ng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=DRNFV1bN8jwznQqj9St8AOJ0znJnHuIDQIoQQascLes=;
b=MVDrue5TcFgySw767MIm00maloZPgkumv2RdXpm8TDU+36Uklyz1w0Iw1zyGdsqzAt
RkZdAzcCnuCxhHrkWsvAYIitU/fk8VdM2oa1ZJCw9jlEMnlnlp3BMw3Ad+vjrK/BrxTk
Rc7tlE2P1oSN49rpBsqkLPTIJLsS3VWMavcz4XoeUPldZDe9QxYnaa5sswzXsNxFRVK6
uNDbanxCYtdGYYnOCpRVlIutluSWLJ1bbHsXwo6VdGvDZ7EqIOdRK3dlnnSC9c6Zld6k
TX/PZra0P4w4bJJlMPr6pMsg3ogdHyFJrJB1zPPLSJHbGB+Uh73gcnZGTd5gcBSQDMI0
hfpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1lecogotfqmejlEY2XnsuCfDbwmPCzZgegbFCHugbR6vImIxOt
DDlJBhCYLv1pIwAkJaysl6c=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4jKXkdSMx/X8eys1XhmVDL5ZiS2oHNRge4yfCpYTzcJAFC2rsLDe6PZrV9NM+2keW3Y8FpNg==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6e8e:0:b0:220:5fa1:d508 with SMTP id
k14-20020a5d6e8e000000b002205fa1d508mr8133714wrz.337.1666256202905;
Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
bl13-20020adfe24d000000b00228de351fc0sm15558063wrb.38.2022.10.20.01.56.42
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: "( via Guix-patches via" <guix-patches@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v3] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
In-Reply-To: <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 20:14:09 +0200
Message-ID: <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi,
Cool! Nice initiative.
On lun., 17 oct. 2022 at 17:50, "\( via Guix-patches" via <guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
Instead of an error, I would prefer a warning. Because, sometimes it is
useful to have this Guix library. :-)
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Oct 2022 08:56:57 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 20 04:56:56 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32935 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1olRMG-0006Yj-MH
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:56 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:57080)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1olRM9-0006Y1-Br
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:51 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60536)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1olRM6-00073B-DW
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:48 -0400
Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]:35407)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1olRM4-0006Zi-Qd
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 04:56:46 -0400
Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id u10so33269934wrq.2
for <guix-patches@HIDDEN>; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=DRNFV1bN8jwznQqj9St8AOJ0znJnHuIDQIoQQascLes=;
b=Uj85S2YVhp6gFlMBf76Eu3IgJnT2eUl7YROiISFOYWpcNUlXQWaCvVFpPBcTJZbJJS
PXRdgXl/iVoRBvgzNrzNXgJBUPFQEURgFu05Qwqy3n/QAgLU4BfMDljqYZSo9ZZtfcyv
PVm73rJ9DjinkjXAfD8vEp0kDqLdFlq74mZ7bxa5/J0TCKgepLl6yLXdTgruxeTkkfPp
986JJAWUQZChl5YPalVys8JFDcw732g49o2IjmZW0RADIiG6FUi/+VhFyaKyT/B/cBzr
loSsdV9cR2K3pRepOJwr/PWaxMTD2rH2gnJSbN576Hq5CIZcD6ZNN734xEWR8NEeTu98
38Ng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=DRNFV1bN8jwznQqj9St8AOJ0znJnHuIDQIoQQascLes=;
b=3BnGFvkhCCGB9ciUK0n1Iof5O0WoZL1Qy1e1Y9LGuhgTPE9gN6/NNsTy+VK6UJdSwF
ojpsg3AgM8ekbe7jgz+QRB+qvDzgS92kRzBgledTy3trQ+wIYDjGHUlhwBAJ6y+MRVLd
aByzTvP2ZdSdG/2FGW/4XojlGpqVITBLqM49pu61+u57d9DfHZ0y07S+MQ3cRaPPun79
hH08jDrncNocEb03aHLDZ196cgZT4VTh7pTB22/r/+uY4TH9z5IEEjULZ8GbqoMLPsrs
biK0IUGucP/J30lpu750Gvo7AGMzSfJ282RujM5CJMqV8MShXTu17cO/IBLceXuk/gqo
vGfA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2jB8pSTzeoUyQ/YWiYgG/7Ohfyt3qb+lRocpwWIpCz4elv+5au
1Fk6z7avNNQiVSkXCWv3fgg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4jKXkdSMx/X8eys1XhmVDL5ZiS2oHNRge4yfCpYTzcJAFC2rsLDe6PZrV9NM+2keW3Y8FpNg==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6e8e:0:b0:220:5fa1:d508 with SMTP id
k14-20020a5d6e8e000000b002205fa1d508mr8133714wrz.337.1666256202905;
Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
bl13-20020adfe24d000000b00228de351fc0sm15558063wrb.38.2022.10.20.01.56.42
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: "( via Guix-patches via" <guix-patches@HIDDEN>, 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v3] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
In-Reply-To: <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 20:14:09 +0200
Message-ID: <874jw2l3m6.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42a;
envelope-from=zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN; helo=mail-wr1-x42a.google.com
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
Hi,
Cool! Nice initiative.
On lun., 17 oct. 2022 at 17:50, "\( via Guix-patches" via <guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote:
> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
Instead of an error, I would prefer a warning. Because, sometimes it is
useful to have this Guix library. :-)
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 16:55:09 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 12:55:09 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49804 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okTOP-0006BW-7W
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:55:09 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:39708)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okTOM-0006BM-GW
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:55:07 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8735D4DB87;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:55:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id ZmEDu0yPsHib; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:55:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666025459; bh=a4qJRv1+xAQM3wvSYUQRXsK+/J+rc2aD0eFcbroTwp4=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date;
b=OwdV174sEucUPVor9Y5ONrSbfPYzjRxrSkKFHIX3u4ZQwbvF3K6xvq2U9RIA/pe4q
B0Rvq69KlBKUvMUjfLw04+CpgBLBQjoLS/4dXllBOHNbncPtqCtthPUVHtAX9fm5lS
D1CYpo5w8TkU441PYWY761stlGJlDJD5PjmBny5dE8fCrOtkVsbww5tlRrM1unDoyK
yz5lt8DFDnw5W+UAX0JQ5XJs8VOszmtJmPYnRlwgLb2I3D35kk9F+34qIAY6Wmwbe3
islGN8DlWUJiLPkEXpFNBHM6CtC53Wyz3DR4CG5qXUnDC2xIuXvz6/pmDfGK39INFu
mvyhA6sllI2gw==
To: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:50:57 +0100
Message-Id: <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail
if the package to be installed is guix from the default channel. ---
guix/scripts/package.scm
| 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+ [...]
Content analysis details: (3.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: jpoiret.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail
if the package to be installed is guix from the default channel. --- guix/scripts/package.scm
| 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+ [...]
Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: jpoiret.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
* guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if the
package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
---
guix/scripts/package.scm | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/guix/scripts/package.scm b/guix/scripts/package.scm
index 7ba2661bbb..9f023ea7b5 100644
--- a/guix/scripts/package.scm
+++ b/guix/scripts/package.scm
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
;;; Copyright © 2018 Steve Sprang <scs@HIDDEN>
;;; Copyright © 2022 Josselin Poiret <dev@HIDDEN>
;;; Copyright © 2022 Antero Mejr <antero@HIDDEN>
+;;; Copyright © 2022 ( <paren@HIDDEN>
;;;
;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
;;;
@@ -699,7 +700,14 @@ (define (store-item->manifest-entry item)
(define (package->manifest-entry* package output)
"Like 'package->manifest-entry', but attach PACKAGE provenance meta-data to
-the resulting manifest entry."
+the resulting manifest entry, and report an error if PACKAGE is the 'guix'
+package from the default channel."
+ (when (and (string=? (package-name package) "guix")
+ (string-prefix? "gnu/" (location-file
+ (package-location package))))
+ (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed~%"))
+ (display-hint (G_ "use 'guix pull' to fetch the latest Guix revision"))
+ (exit 1))
(manifest-entry-with-provenance
(package->manifest-entry package output)))
--
2.38.0
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 16:49:09 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 12:49:09 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49772 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okTIa-00060P-SO
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:09 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:41624)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okTIZ-00060G-9Q
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:08 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041AF4CA26;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:49:06 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id JSk5Vwew4PIl; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:49:05 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666024989; bh=3h8wDYoXqVETs3zT7XD9tXYeRJ+3jn2sRND4dkNBZmw=;
h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:From:References:In-Reply-To;
b=O263i8/AA49FsLIb8AqHRrvWnxl9GDbXXZqCI/sLvtmm9VI1STrjNVC6tAd8hja82
KffWbMGCIggYk8IfZ0cxwWG/w2aITxbZUzdmMgirfeaV3YZhpXEmsB5KOkU81KbJfD
i/WkTqo8WaKBqjQJQcKteq/Qe2PXZW0FM1W++144/jQrN9H1rHrRfR20GZbPx+951s
/7f8dqtpholAM06uJMYzNLmyvfAoSaoIkEmYSua8Fpfl60ASj23CkyYRiE4v+ZkMgH
OIe1nz5vq59JNaShKkffnq9PDwF4xFxOIDJ4KqCObAzgoirsGbr2XZ4p2cbw6HMDzT
h6ZmOua72o3gQ==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:43:08 +0100
Message-Id: <CNOCKHY5OTZP.1MQ2W28DK5FZJ@guix-framework>
To: "Tobias Geerinckx-Rice" <me@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v2] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN> <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
In-Reply-To: <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Heya, On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 5:24 PM BST,
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
wrote: > > + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be > >
installed"))
> > + (newline (current-error-port)) > > I would write (repo [...]
Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
Heya,
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 5:24 PM BST, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> > + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be=20
> > installed"))
> > + (newline (current-error-port))
>
> I would write (report-error "=E2=80=A6~%") sans (newline). If you=20
> intentionally didn't, let's explicitly discuss that.
Agh, silly me. I'll correct that in a moment.
-- (
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 16:49:25 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 12:49:25 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49776 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okTIr-00060x-6d
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:25 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:49108)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okTIq-00060l-46
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:24 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45450)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okTId-0005oM-NF
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:21 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:42364)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okTIa-0002qo-Er
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:49:10 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041AF4CA26;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:49:06 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id JSk5Vwew4PIl; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:49:05 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666024989; bh=3h8wDYoXqVETs3zT7XD9tXYeRJ+3jn2sRND4dkNBZmw=;
h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:From:References:In-Reply-To;
b=O263i8/AA49FsLIb8AqHRrvWnxl9GDbXXZqCI/sLvtmm9VI1STrjNVC6tAd8hja82
KffWbMGCIggYk8IfZ0cxwWG/w2aITxbZUzdmMgirfeaV3YZhpXEmsB5KOkU81KbJfD
i/WkTqo8WaKBqjQJQcKteq/Qe2PXZW0FM1W++144/jQrN9H1rHrRfR20GZbPx+951s
/7f8dqtpholAM06uJMYzNLmyvfAoSaoIkEmYSua8Fpfl60ASj23CkyYRiE4v+ZkMgH
OIe1nz5vq59JNaShKkffnq9PDwF4xFxOIDJ4KqCObAzgoirsGbr2XZ4p2cbw6HMDzT
h6ZmOua72o3gQ==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:43:08 +0100
Message-Id: <CNOCKHY5OTZP.1MQ2W28DK5FZJ@guix-framework>
To: "Tobias Geerinckx-Rice" <me@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v2] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN> <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
In-Reply-To: <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.21.23.139; envelope-from=paren@HIDDEN;
helo=knopi.disroot.org
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Heya,
On Mon Oct 17, 2022 at 5:24 PM BST, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> > + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be=20
> > installed"))
> > + (newline (current-error-port))
>
> I would write (report-error "=E2=80=A6~%") sans (newline). If you=20
> intentionally didn't, let's explicitly discuss that.
Agh, silly me. I'll correct that in a moment.
-- (
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 16:33:27 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 12:33:27 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49730 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okT3P-0005Yg-D4
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:27 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([80.241.217.52]:43684)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1okT3M-0005YV-Ep
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:26 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=KEyo2tIC0+Y6f
1GlEeA/rxmVVlMEQa1GtTkxHNWbItM=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to:
from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=m21+QG002PnTRpA1zmXLz0KMgz7jC2MRbWwV7Y
JPuH4QTJiOA6bkp7WwnAZwb9jL8aFeT7nMmyecrXyY1wufKtHwX/ggmOD+3c8ojsYdMY8Q
n167FMo6s3Uws2ZN0SOE2UyR4+GoEC149FLDXA2t91vLP2bfQ6TT4cq10vHUiCYB+nSrI7
Scf66RjSoTs/9QEzUKV9mxirCD+6xAv2dT+3MakmAfN0B9aMqIlSLRaTKDoWaqm6ATczr0
/NE0Hs64vL7pMPLFn5YMvf+I0kRDXuIR/Ywiog3app2sYDri7BPj/e7EbVv4PpOiLXCihi
Vb6L+vm6GltcK8CezdkOSKSA==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 14470cf4
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 16:33:14 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
To: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v2] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:24:16 +0200
In-reply-to: <20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hullo.
"( via Guix-patches" via =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if=20
> the
> package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
=E2=99=A5
As noted elsewhere, I've come to support this, er, straightforward=20
approach. It might offend some readers, so let's leave this open=20
for comment a bit longer.
I should like to merge it before 1.4, though.
> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be=20
> installed"))
> + (newline (current-error-port))
I would write (report-error "=E2=80=A6~%") sans (newline). If you=20
intentionally didn't, let's explicitly discuss that.
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY02D6A0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15XgcBALNRWnzTtDX6uwX2X2teEbidhdXbIFSnNWwUqZ+e
g/1aAQCJ6LY211z5cJTHVEi9RjNpJxMM7HgwQ4Jx2JUJqxOEDA==
=yHcO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 16:33:33 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 12:33:33 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49734 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okT3U-0005Yz-ME
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:32 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:34066)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1okT3T-0005Ys-31
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:31 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56454)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1okT3S-0003rs-T4
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:30 -0400
Received: from tobias.gr ([2a02:c205:2020:6054::1]:55706)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1okT3O-0000KS-Ul
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:33:30 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=KEyo2tIC0+Y6f
1GlEeA/rxmVVlMEQa1GtTkxHNWbItM=;
h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to:
from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=m21+QG002PnTRpA1zmXLz0KMgz7jC2MRbWwV7Y
JPuH4QTJiOA6bkp7WwnAZwb9jL8aFeT7nMmyecrXyY1wufKtHwX/ggmOD+3c8ojsYdMY8Q
n167FMo6s3Uws2ZN0SOE2UyR4+GoEC149FLDXA2t91vLP2bfQ6TT4cq10vHUiCYB+nSrI7
Scf66RjSoTs/9QEzUKV9mxirCD+6xAv2dT+3MakmAfN0B9aMqIlSLRaTKDoWaqm6ATczr0
/NE0Hs64vL7pMPLFn5YMvf+I0kRDXuIR/Ywiog3app2sYDri7BPj/e7EbVv4PpOiLXCihi
Vb6L+vm6GltcK8CezdkOSKSA==
Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 14470cf4
(TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO);
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 16:33:14 +0000 (UTC)
References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
<20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN>
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
To: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH v2] scripts: package: Forbid installation of
the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 18:24:16 +0200
In-reply-to: <20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN>
BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default;
Message-ID: <871qr6e7fb.fsf@nckx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:c205:2020:6054::1; envelope-from=me@HIDDEN;
helo=tobias.gr
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hullo.
"( via Guix-patches" via =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if=20
> the
> package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
=E2=99=A5
As noted elsewhere, I've come to support this, er, straightforward=20
approach. It might offend some readers, so let's leave this open=20
for comment a bit longer.
I should like to merge it before 1.4, though.
> + (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be=20
> installed"))
> + (newline (current-error-port))
I would write (report-error "=E2=80=A6~%") sans (newline). If you=20
intentionally didn't, let's explicitly discuss that.
Kind regards,
T G-R
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCY02D6A0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15XgcBALNRWnzTtDX6uwX2X2teEbidhdXbIFSnNWwUqZ+e
g/1aAQCJ6LY211z5cJTHVEi9RjNpJxMM7HgwQ4Jx2JUJqxOEDA==
=yHcO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 12:23:00 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 08:23:00 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47694 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okP91-0006rg-TO
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:23:00 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:44416)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okP8z-0006rY-Uv
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:22:58 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5ED4DC06;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:22:57 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id lBDdPlTvWGFH; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:22:55 +0200 (CEST)
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666009375; bh=+8QRP3AizEtJYXibtE30yFuYZXB7T22V/z/hO9fBxDc=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date;
b=XhhKybaaJPagUvBNmnrepOVEZ1rBpvJXcgi1GVao/gbAuHQvppUw1Wz+updybxo+g
JaWYr/6A5HtGwz6MU/pW1FW7+j3wgtZvOEpz9xxZFUoeXCMLmU0y03tZdKqgQMj6WM
VSnIGjXoibFs9zLnuzCtex/54AXac+U89Fwhn4D1iOP53WiBJlWErop7lxqs2pKxcT
iGNcpdI47nAYjIy6ljPktWz7B/D6bfSjLubIpJ5wdWZIbgxmvRwTR1ZfOk8Vl+EnTR
h+oYvjN7qEL7D+kevwrIematz/0M30v8TSYsnYsvJx9y4ImQ53xqRa2dchzZt+IzOs
e8aHd4q0GMWiw==
To: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:22:54 +0100
Message-Id: <20221017122254.16230-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail
if the package to be installed is guix from the default channel. ---
guix/scripts/package.scm
| 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions [...]
Content analysis details: (3.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: jpoiret.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail
if the package to be installed is guix from the default channel. --- guix/scripts/package.scm
| 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions [...]
Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: jpoiret.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
* guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if the
package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
---
guix/scripts/package.scm | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/guix/scripts/package.scm b/guix/scripts/package.scm
index 7ba2661bbb..d0feb2063a 100644
--- a/guix/scripts/package.scm
+++ b/guix/scripts/package.scm
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
;;; Copyright © 2018 Steve Sprang <scs@HIDDEN>
;;; Copyright © 2022 Josselin Poiret <dev@HIDDEN>
;;; Copyright © 2022 Antero Mejr <antero@HIDDEN>
+;;; Copyright © 2022 ( <paren@HIDDEN>
;;;
;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
;;;
@@ -699,7 +700,15 @@ (define (store-item->manifest-entry item)
(define (package->manifest-entry* package output)
"Like 'package->manifest-entry', but attach PACKAGE provenance meta-data to
-the resulting manifest entry."
+the resulting manifest entry, and report an error if PACKAGE is the 'guix'
+package from the default channel."
+ (when (and (string=? (package-name package) "guix")
+ (string-prefix? "gnu/" (location-file
+ (package-location package))))
+ (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed"))
+ (newline (current-error-port))
+ (display-hint (G_ "use 'guix pull' to fetch the latest Guix revision"))
+ (exit 1))
(manifest-entry-with-provenance
(package->manifest-entry package output)))
--
2.38.0
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 12:18:38 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 08:18:38 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47686 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okP4n-0006kO-N3
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:18:37 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:44206)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okP4l-0006kG-AH
for 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:18:36 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A717A4DBCA;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:18:34 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with UTF8SMTP id JNmYG4ehTqLn; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:18:33 +0200 (CEST)
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666009109; bh=ldZRAsN52bPmbU+2AoJEBuutUJRlSFOLGBm8KA+YX5Y=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date;
b=bcFc5q4S5JmkDfZRmGtCy9eaHMZr5cw/xvXr5Xs6oukIHfh2PR5ISm8EES/nOOVwt
ZD6uMdnsFLZCa3E0ZtBsFujxLM195eymVahilKp5c1VkDh1nZjTSCJ5BE6C1BozhjR
dIFcsOTyMejfU8ADMe4ULIUpSU6HEPcYWPEUz3YjjwBK990QbB+VErHsU6vea4XY3b
J5fJc9xAYOGIWVsRkvxwernmvzRZlcfKFQ4D9xAh5dS/PG7D0UfUhrub0zinBWljNd
nGt0Xv0H3I2LPTx3sxEkTQ67Y61U7V2uoM6huC++AAf1MgW9loy+lxkdDjyxeTVUP9
Xxq0ye41xtOQQ==
To: 58583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:18:27 +0100
Message-Id: <20221017121827.15571-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: * guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail
if the package to be installed is guix from the default channel. ---
guix/scripts/package.scm
| 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+ [...]
Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.3 FROM_ONE_CHAR Bogus FROM name
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 58583
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
* guix/scripts/package.scm (package->manifest-entry*): Fail if the
package to be installed is guix from the default channel.
---
guix/scripts/package.scm | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/guix/scripts/package.scm b/guix/scripts/package.scm
index 7ba2661bbb..886415f41e 100644
--- a/guix/scripts/package.scm
+++ b/guix/scripts/package.scm
@@ -699,7 +699,15 @@ (define (store-item->manifest-entry item)
(define (package->manifest-entry* package output)
"Like 'package->manifest-entry', but attach PACKAGE provenance meta-data to
-the resulting manifest entry."
+the resulting manifest entry, and report an error if PACKAGE is the 'guix'
+package from the default channel."
+ (when (and (string=? (package-name package) "guix")
+ (string-prefix? "gnu/" (location-file
+ (package-location package))))
+ (report-error (G_ "the 'guix' package should not be installed"))
+ (newline (current-error-port))
+ (display-hint (G_ "use 'guix pull' to fetch the latest Guix revision"))
+ (exit 1))
(manifest-entry-with-provenance
(package->manifest-entry package output)))
--
2.38.0
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2022 12:17:22 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 17 08:17:22 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47681 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1okP3a-0006i7-Am
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:17:22 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:42978)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okP3S-0006ht-HS
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:17:20 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59896)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okP3R-0006bU-Je
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:17:14 -0400
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:50886)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <paren@HIDDEN>) id 1okP3B-0006ER-NS
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:17:13 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF444DD4E;
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:16:53 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org
Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pSzyOYwx0LzH; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:16:52 +0200 (CEST)
From: "(" <paren@HIDDEN>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail;
t=1666009012; bh=dxdJgGQ2z0QijZyIT0mRZf62ge+6xWTIOXmmBbv5UTo=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date;
b=AAqunIzi143v5+nmdqIReVVy/Xr5U0DTuOQ1XQkVzCy6f2CbNO+DJUtBdNS8w3ldU
xX0LOJn6eIF2BrUsXSeS5yD+rcBXX+9+J82fcxCdA7ZicbPocSdF1qV2t2yf941zBa
kZzm71VGLWkW6Y2bfivgGg7z2Cfe8v5l4Dk0tLb5KALvU0w2TVnK+PFiXzhuyksGpT
XbwsceWvVXbx/eFdDa+uVfgT4gc7uyWom6FELEHUjSYvqV4HZkk/n9l0jEUNNX2Cwh
d02qQutecFpO5/xgz82IGoJacn3rUaTR1hPNeHEneR/JIJ71ff9KdGYsA7HIeDyx+j
hiBlvCQ979Psw==
To: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:16:42 +0100
Message-Id: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@HIDDEN>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.21.23.139; envelope-from=paren@HIDDEN;
helo=knopi.disroot.org
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: "\(" <paren@HIDDEN>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
This patch forbids installation of the ``guix'' package through ``guix package''
et al. It's a wee bit of a hack, but after some discussion on IRC, we seemed to
come to the conclusion that this would be the best thing to do, and it will
finally fix the long-standing issue with newcomers running ``guix install guix''.
( (1):
scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.
guix/scripts/package.scm | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.38.0
"(" <paren@HIDDEN>:guix-patches@HIDDEN.
Full text available.guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#58583; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.