Status update:
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> In addition to the nice stuff we already have, it’d be nice to add:
>
> • wip-container, I think we’re almst there;
Done (a couple of small testing issues need to be solved.)
> • finalize multiple-server support in ‘guix substitut
On 16/10/2015, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Talking about interactive CLIs, in general I am not a fan of it too,
>> especially after you get used to the program. That's why I am using
>> plain apt-get instead of aptitude which uses ncurses. However, I will
>> say it is sometimes
Alex Vong writes:
> Talking about interactive CLIs, in general I am not a fan of it too,
> especially after you get used to the program. That's why I am using
> plain apt-get instead of aptitude which uses ncurses. However, I will
> say it is sometimes useful.
Isn't ‘apt-get upgrade’ interactive
On 15/10/2015, Thompson, David wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Mathieu Lirzin
> wrote:
>> Eric Bavier writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:44:39 +0200
>>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>>>
Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
taylanbayi...@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
> I seem to remember 'guix gc' even removing things that are actually
> necessary for building a profile, which is a ubiquitous operation of
> course. Does anyone know if that's been fixed on the meanwhile,
I think it hasn’t. :-)
"Thompson, David" writes:
> [...] I'm fine with 'guix gc' working as-is. The re-downloading lots
> of substitutes issue is not an issue about the CLI, but rather about
> not making store items that you want to hang around GC roots.
Hmm, good point. Rather than making it harder to do what 'gui
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>
>> I think the enthusiasm for changing ‘guix gc’ was induced by somekind of
>> shared experience of typing it loosely and ending up having to download
>> a lot of substitutes again.
>
> But, but… you could always hit C-c when that
Christopher Allan Webber skribis:
> There's no need to be sorry. This was a useful conversation. I think
> it's worth recognizing the pain points users are hitting. Even though
> Dave's solution keeps "guix gc" as needed, it's helping highlighting how
> much we need such solutions in order for
Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
> I think the enthusiasm for changing ‘guix gc’ was induced by somekind of
> shared experience of typing it loosely and ending up having to download
> a lot of substitutes again.
But, but… you could always hit C-c when that happens, no?
Ludo’.
Daniel Pimentel writes:
>> The GC is not too greedy. It's doing exactly what it should. The
>> issue is that we need more tools to let people protect things from the
>> GC that they want protected. One example that is that 'guix
>> environment' will eventually generate profiles that are registe
"Thompson, David" writes:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
>> "Thompson, David" writes:
>>> In general, I do not like interactive CLIs. I'm fine with 'guix gc'
>>> working as-is. The re-downloading lots of substitutes issue is not an
>>> issue about the CLI, but rather
The GC is not too greedy. It's doing exactly what it should. The
issue is that we need more tools to let people protect things from the
GC that they want protected. One example that is that 'guix
environment' will eventually generate profiles that are registered as
GC roots, which will protect
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> "Thompson, David" writes:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> [...]
>>> I think the enthusiasm for changing ‘guix gc’ was induced by somekind of
>>> shared experience of typing it loosely and ending up having to d
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> Eric Bavier writes:
>
>> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:44:39 +0200
>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>>
>>> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>>>
>>> > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> >
>>> >> Dunno, I admit I’m not as enthusiastic as the
"Thompson, David" writes:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
[...]
>> I think the enthusiasm for changing ‘guix gc’ was induced by somekind of
>> shared experience of typing it loosely and ending up having to download
>> a lot of substitutes again. So maybe we can keep ‘gu
Eric Bavier writes:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:44:39 +0200
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>
>> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>>
>> > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> >
>> >> Dunno, I admit I’m not as enthusiastic as the other people here. :-)
>> >>
>> >> What would ‘guix gc’ (without
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:44:39 +0200
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
> Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
>
> > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> >
> >> Dunno, I admit I’m not as enthusiastic as the other people here. :-)
> >>
> >> What would ‘guix gc’ (without any option) do?
> >
> > Show --he
Mathieu Lirzin skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Dunno, I admit I’m not as enthusiastic as the other people here. :-)
>>
>> What would ‘guix gc’ (without any option) do?
>
> Show --help and exit(0)? ;)
Sure we could do that, but I’m not convinced it’s an improvement. WDYT
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Dunno, I admit I’m not as enthusiastic as the other people here. :-)
>
> What would ‘guix gc’ (without any option) do?
Show --help and exit(0)? ;)
--
Mathieu Lirzin
Alex Vong skribis:
> Regarding gc, I remember I accidentally ran "guix gc" and removed all
> the build dependencies like bash, glibc... Then, I realized the proper
> way to run gc is to run "guix gc -d ".
I wouldn’t call it “the proper way.” Most of the time, I simply want to
free space on my d
Mathieu Lirzin writes:
> Ricardo Wurmus writes:
>
>> Alex Vong writes:
>>
>>> Regarding gc, I remember I accidentally ran "guix gc" and removed all
>>> the build dependencies like bash, glibc... Then, I realized the proper
>>> way to run gc is to run "guix gc -d ". Perhaps we should
>>> change
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Regarding gc, I remember I accidentally ran "guix gc" and removed all
>> the build dependencies like bash, glibc... Then, I realized the proper
>> way to run gc is to run "guix gc -d ". Perhaps we should
>> change the command for garbage collecting
Alex Vong writes:
> Regarding gc, I remember I accidentally ran "guix gc" and removed all
> the build dependencies like bash, glibc... Then, I realized the proper
> way to run gc is to run "guix gc -d ". Perhaps we should
> change the command for garbage collecting everything from "guix gc" to
>
Regarding gc, I remember I accidentally ran "guix gc" and removed all
the build dependencies like bash, glibc... Then, I realized the proper
way to run gc is to run "guix gc -d ". Perhaps we should
change the command for garbage collecting everything from "guix gc" to
"guix gc -a" and "guix gc --al
Daniel Pimentel skribis:
> What do you think about add alias "clean" to "gc"?
>
> For example:
> "guix clean" as alias to "guix gc"
I’m not very enthusiastic. ;-) Ideally, we’d provide a generic alias
mechanism so that everyone can add their favorite names.
Ludo’.
What do you think about add alias "clean" to "gc"?
For example:
"guix clean" as alias to "guix gc"
--
Daniel Pimentel (d4n1 3:)
Hello!
It’s time to talk about the next release, 0.9.0 (I think the service
rewrite is one good reason to bump the middle number.)
In addition to the nice stuff we already have, it’d be nice to add:
• wip-container, I think we’re almst there;
• finalize multiple-server support in ‘guix
27 matches
Mail list logo
