Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > Ludovic Courtès (2015-11-23 02:04 +0300) wrote: > >> Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: >> >>> Ludovic Courtès (2015-11-22 13:52 +0300) wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>> but it suits only the default case of a single user profile. If I >>> have several user profiles, it does nothing useful for me, only wastes >>> the time. >> >> I think this is fine. ~/.guix-profile is treated specially in many >> ways. I think users do not expect other profiles to be magically taken >> into account. > > Yes, this is a good default option, all I wanted to say is if I don't > use Guix in a default way, I would like to change this default option to > suit my needs.
IMO this is beyond the scope of this discussion: /etc/profile already sources ~/.guix-profile/etc/profile explicitly, and not anything else. [...] >>> … what I suggest now is just to give an option to avoid generating the >>> default /etc/profile. What about making an 'operating-system' field for >>> this file (similar to 'sudoers-file' or 'hosts-file')? So when such >>> 'profile-file' is specified, it will be used instead of the default one >>> (of course, it should be mentioned in the manual that it's only for >>> those users who are sure what they do). >> >> I think we could make an /etc/profile-service that receives snippets >> meant to be glued together into the final /etc/profile. Users could >> specify the top or bottom of the file. >> >> There could be a combined-search-paths-service that implements the >> solution I proposed here. >> >> WDYT? > > I agree, the more ways to change a default behaviour, the better. > Although I will not use these things if there will be ‘profile-file’ > field that allows to specify my own "/etc/profile". [...] > Great! So is it OK to send a patch for adding ‘profile-file’ field? Hmm, I’m not sure if we want to give direct access to /etc/profile like this. The problem is that several things in there are here to make the system work, and to to make it conform to the ‘operating-system’ declaration, such as: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- export LANG="en_US.utf8" export TZ="Europe/Paris" export TZDIR="/gnu/store/rwvf6xqgsyb8bmpi7rwk9fildnwvzrv5-tzdata-2015c/share/zoneinfo" # Tell 'modprobe' & co. where to look for modules. export LINUX_MODULE_DIRECTORY=/run/booted-system/kernel/lib/modules --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- The risk I see with adding a raw ‘profile-file’ option is that newcomers may end up getting rid of such things without really noticing, and then getting a broken system. What about instead giving a way to populate the top and/or bottom of this file? Controversial parts, if any, could still be turned on and off by adding or removing services that add these lines? I think we should open a separate bug report to discuss this. >> But I think it’s also >> important to discuss the defaults, to make sure they are acceptable to >> many and that they improve the “user experience.” > > I'm probably not the person to discuss the defaults, as very often I > find defaults inappropriate. Understood. I’m sure you’ll understand, though, that it’s in the interest of the project and its users to provide a good user experience firsthand. Thanks for your feedback, Ludo’.
