Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 17.09.2020, 21:10 +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > Hi, > > Leo Prikler <leo.prik...@student.tugraz.at> skribis: > > > Am Donnerstag, den 17.09.2020, 17:31 +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > > > Hi Leo, > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > ‘scm_program_arguments_fluid’ is marked as SCM_INTERNAL, so it’s > > > really > > > inaccessible. > > Thought so. > > > > > However, perhaps we could save the initial value of (program- > > > arguments) > > > in (guix ui) and use that in (guix describe)? > > I'd personally put it in (guix describe) and use the same autoload > > trick, that you've now used for %package-module-path (or a > > dedicated > > save-...-excursion). > > In general, (guix …) module should not depend on (gnu …) modules, > which > rules out this option. Sure, but program-arguments are not defined in (gnu …) and it is a (guix scripts …) that eventually pulls in %package-module-path. Therefore defining %guix-initial-program-arguments (or whatever it will be called in the end) in (guix describe) still seems like an option to me.
> > (guix ui) has a heavy closure for (guix describe) to pull. > > Every (guix scripts …) module depends on (guix ui) via the ‘guix’ > command. (Probably something we could improve, but that’s the way it > is.) > > Now, I realize my proposal was misguided because (guix describe) > should > remain “UI-free” so to speak. Hmm… With that however, I am no longer so sure. The initial program arguments are part of the UI, but at the same time, that would make it not UI-free to begin with. Kinda strengthens the argument, that it should be made a fluid/parameter/what have you, that gets initialized with program-arguments at some point. Regards, Leo
