John Darrington <j...@darrington.wattle.id.au> skribis: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:55:13PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
[...] > > Also, it would only work if nfs-utils was installed in the current > system profile, > > which need not be the case. It might be installed only in root's > profile or I might > > want to see what happens if I use an alternative version of nfs-utils. > > That ???mount??? can invoke ???mount.nfs??? looks like a convenience to > me, not > something highly critical. > > Well it's critical if "mount -a" is going to work, and thus if NFS > filesystems (such as /home in > many networks) can be automatically mounted at boot time. GuixSD doesn’t use the ‘mount’ command to mount file systems so that shouldn’t have any influence. > I would say that dynamic composition (???mount??? looking up > ???mount.nfs??? & > co. in $PATH) is OK in this case. The NFS service in GuixSD could > extend ???profile-service-type??? such that ???nfs-utils??? is indeed in > the > system profile. > > Ok If you think it's acceptable I'll push a change with just the > "--enable-fs-paths-default=/run/current-system/profile/sbin" option for now. > If it > turns out not to be good enough then we can rethink it later. Yes, I agree. 1,093 packages depend on util-linux. Per the strategy outlined at <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00933.html> this could go to ‘staging’ but I think this should go to ‘core-updates’ which we’ll reopen to fix <http://bugs.gnu.org/24703>. Thanks, Ludo’.
