>On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 10:42:42PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> If there’s consensus to install the symlink, that’s fine with me (if we >> take that route, I would also suggest submitting a patch upstream so GCC >> installs the symlink.) > >I am not in favour of adding such a symlink on our own and would rather >keep with the standard builds as we usually do when there is no compelling >reason to do otherwise.
That's interesting. Consider that: * such a symlink would have spared much frustration to Mark (see earlier posts in this thread). * It is likely that the update of 'gobject-introspection' to a newer version would not have caused problems (see earlier posts in this thread and https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-01/msg00196.html). And, from Ludovic's comment: "So far we’ve resisted the temptation. ...", I understand that there are a few other packages which would benefit. * Up to now nobody could point out any *technical* drawback. (And if we find one later, we can always revert.) Even if an action if beneficial to, say, 1 in 100 packages without drawbacks to the other ones and the fix of that single package is easy, it is still worth doing. I do not see a large number of people contributing to this project. It is therefore important to minimize the likelihood of a required manual intervention to fix problems. Maintaining 1000's of software packages is time consuming! It would be the *GUIX project* the one who would benefit if decisions would be taken based on technical arguments and merits instead of feelings or the mood of the day. Fede