From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Nov 23 06:55:41 2015 Received: (at 20255) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2015 11:55:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49010 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a0pie-0000be-Lq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:55:41 -0500 Received: from mail-lf0-f50.google.com ([209.85.215.50]:35879) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a0piK-0000b9-4R for 20255@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:55:38 -0500 Received: by lfs39 with SMTP id 39so105772115lfs.3 for <20255@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 03:55:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=e64FRDSvAe3V4w87T6SIxJdNIVhWT15bepedRCxhUKg=; b=irkNsnao6BUWg8IFIQcAje8LWnL8PSJr/BmWwKCvgUFJ7LLoMrIDgVUXXb2tDSEI7z mE1As+HrHqhorQbmtMOEJyNZUUVSARgKs0aed8ZBDcJ0EoGBBlcPjavKWm3XbZqcPY6+ p7h89TF6JhtAWXFIDprEI2mlsWnl7EryUZuYjsgJgm9isrzTwiQvBQLRk0lZfkXqGgSd OjvgVCp8V43vWeU2RsKeTS+kaX/0A8Fo7DO88Y14zfINYqxa2r7qz51L8n2a+ADjaaGj AXCPazgjgqtVE0NadCW/VG7s+rH6a6ZapltEK0PAQRDRVXWxGqltMyV17Xb3cYz3EQnK 3P3A== X-Received: by 10.25.39.19 with SMTP id n19mr8571247lfn.156.1448279719117; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 03:55:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g5sm1757469lbd.26.2015.11.23.03.55.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Nov 2015 03:55:18 -0800 (PST) From: Alex Kost To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#20255: 'search-paths' should respect both user and system profile. References: <877ftschjt.fsf@gmail.com> <87fv8fip01.fsf@gnu.org> <87d23j1bxk.fsf@gmail.com> <871tjyfnl8.fsf@gnu.org> <876199q4z1.fsf@gmail.com> <87ioca4ojo.fsf@gnu.org> <87lh9tvcws.fsf@gnu.org> <87h9kguwc4.fsf@gmail.com> <87ziy7d90z.fsf@gnu.org> <874mgfkxee.fsf@gmail.com> <87wptb5d1y.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3jisc76.fsf@gmail.com> <87lh9q1f2i.fsf@gnu.org> <877fl9q3gv.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9kdy6ty.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 14:55:18 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87h9kdy6ty.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:04:09 +0100") Message-ID: <871tbh53rt.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 20255 Cc: 20255@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2015-11-23 02:04 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost skribis: > >> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2015-11-22 13:52 +0300) wrote: > > [...] > >> but it suits only the default case of a single user profile. If I >> have several user profiles, it does nothing useful for me, only wastes >> the time. > > I think this is fine. ~/.guix-profile is treated specially in many > ways. I think users do not expect other profiles to be magically taken > into account. Yes, this is a good default option, all I wanted to say is if I don't use Guix in a default way, I would like to change this default option to suit my needs. >>> What would you suggest? >> >> After all, I realized what is my main concern: "/etc/profile" is >> non-editable. If I don't like some pieces of this file, I can do >> nothing, and I just have to live with it and suffer. Ideally I would >> like to decide what pieces I want to put in /etc/profile and what I >> don't. But it's probably not possible, so=E2=80=A6 >> >> =E2=80=A6 what I suggest now is just to give an option to avoid generati= ng the >> default /etc/profile. What about making an 'operating-system' field for >> this file (similar to 'sudoers-file' or 'hosts-file')? So when such >> 'profile-file' is specified, it will be used instead of the default one >> (of course, it should be mentioned in the manual that it's only for >> those users who are sure what they do). > > I think we could make an /etc/profile-service that receives snippets > meant to be glued together into the final /etc/profile. Users could > specify the top or bottom of the file. > > There could be a combined-search-paths-service that implements the > solution I proposed here. > > WDYT? I agree, the more ways to change a default behaviour, the better. Although I will not use these things if there will be =E2=80=98profile-file= =E2=80=99 field that allows to specify my own "/etc/profile". >> If this 'profile-file' field appears, I will gladly use it, and I will >> not object to any future changes in /etc/profile. > > Of course we want to offer this flexibility. Great! So is it OK to send a patch for adding =E2=80=98profile-file=E2=80= =99 field? > But I think it=E2=80=99s also > important to discuss the defaults, to make sure they are acceptable to > many and that they improve the =E2=80=9Cuser experience.=E2=80=9D I'm probably not the person to discuss the defaults, as very often I find defaults inappropriate. For example, invoking "guix package --search-paths" in /etc/profile is a totally unacceptable default for me (sorry for mentioning it all the time :-)) --=20 Alex