[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Inconsistencies in 'guix system' and 'guix package'
From: |
Alex Kost |
Subject: |
Re: Inconsistencies in 'guix system' and 'guix package' |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:36:39 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
Ludovic Courtès (2015-10-27 19:06 +0300) wrote:
> Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> 1. Should 'guix system' actions share the same options?
>>
>> I think it is confusing that recently added 'guix system' actions
>> (dmd-graph, extension-graph and list-generations) can take the same
>> command-line options as the other system actions (--dry-run, --no-grub,
>> etc.), because specifying these options doesn't take any effect.
>>
>> Another thing: "guix system <any-action> --help" displays the same help
>> message for any action. With 'list-generations' it is even more
>> confusing, as (unlike the other actions) it takes PATTERN, not FILE as
>> the positional argument.
>>
>> What about splitting 'guix system' into submodules (as it is done for
>> 'guix import') with putting general bits into (guix scripts system)?
>
> I like the idea of submodules à la ‘guix import’! Would you like to
> give it a try? The thing is, all the actions except ‘list-generations’
> have a lot in common.
Yes, I would like to give a try, though I will not give a time to it
very soon :-( But sooner or later… I hope :-)
[...]
>> Analogously, would it be appropriate to replace some 'guix package'
>> options (--show, --list-generations --list-installed, --list-available)
>> with subcommands ('guix package show', ...)?
>
> But then some operations would have no subcommands: install, remove,
> rollback, etc. So the syntax would be:
>
> guix package SUBCOMMAND OPTIONS
>
> or:
>
> guix package OPTIONS
>
> depending on the situation. That’s not great either.
Heh, not great, I agree.
> Maybe (thinking out loud) we could separate this in:
>
> guix package -> for installation, removal, upgrade, rollback
> guix query -> for list-whatever, show
>
> and then we need to find a place for --delete-generations.
>
> Thoughts?
'guix query' sounds interesting!
> Seems like a can of worms, definitely post-0.9.0.
Indeed; I just feel there are things to improve there, so I raised this
question. But I should probably say "Sorry for bothering", as I don't
really have my understanding how an ideal 'guix package' should look.
Thanks for answering! (and sorry for bothering)
--
Alex