Hi Ludovic,
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Note that I think we’ll most likely have a single ‘guix’ script in the
> near future, so that ‘guix-pull’ can actually update everything: Guix,
> commands, and distro.
Okay, I have another proposal. I've written a proposed 'guix' script
that's
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> So I've been working on a patch to fix the ./pre-inst-env problem using
> portable shell code instead of Guile code, as you suggested, and this is
> the kind of code I'm coming up with:
The first snippet looks good to me.
> but the more I look at this ugly, buggy code;
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>>
>>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the propagation of $GUILE_LOAD_PATH &
co. to subprocesses, because we know there’s none anyway.
>>>
>>> That policy
Hi Ludovic,
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the propagation of $GUILE_LOAD_PATH &
>>> co. to subprocesses, because we know there’s none anyway.
>>
>> That policy will lead to future w
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the propagation of $GUILE_LOAD_PATH &
>>> co. to subprocesses, because we know there’s none anyway.
>>
>> That policy will lead to future where libguile
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the propagation of $GUILE_LOAD_PATH &
>> co. to subprocesses, because we know there’s none anyway.
>
> That policy will lead to future where libguile-using programs break in
> random ways when they
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the propagation of $GUILE_LOAD_PATH &
> co. to subprocesses, because we know there’s none anyway.
That policy will lead to future where libguile-using programs break in
random ways when they happen to be subprocesses of each
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> The second patch is the main subject of this email. It reworks the
> shell script headers at the top of 'guix-package' and the other scripts
> to avoid modifying environment variables (which could propagate to
> unrelated subprocesses that use libguile), and to avoid pre
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> From 172011c586a96cd15e6401cf813fd6d6ea59b355 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Mark H Weaver
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:23:20 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Add noinst_SCRIPTS = pre-inst-env to Makefile.am.
>
> * Makefile.am: Add noinst_SCRIPTS = pre-inst-env.
> ---
> Ma
Here's an improved version of the second patch. There's no functional
difference, but the code is easier to read IMO.
Mark
>From b1ea7f6ab01fb5c1ae1638315dad3fc8903682dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark H Weaver
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:13:32 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Improve shell s
I wrote:
> I've attached two patches. The first arranges to make sure that
> 'pre-inst-env' will be rebuilt when 'pre-inst-env.in' is modified.
>
> The second patch is the main subject of this email. It reworks the
> shell script headers at the top of 'guix-package' and the other scripts
> to av
Hello all,
I've attached two patches. The first arranges to make sure that
'pre-inst-env' will be rebuilt when 'pre-inst-env.in' is modified.
The second patch is the main subject of this email. It reworks the
shell script headers at the top of 'guix-package' and the other scripts
to avoid modif
12 matches
Mail list logo
