From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zimoun Subject: bug#38529: Make --ad-hoc the default for guix environment proposed deprecation mechanism Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 18:55:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87eexeu8mo.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87k16vdise.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhfp2w11.fsf@web.de> <871rt03shq.fsf@web.de> <87zhfn3hgj.fsf@web.de> <87tv5upttv.fsf@elephly.net> <87o8w1mxjt.fsf@gnu.org> <87blrqp2pp.fsf@euandre.org> <878smu85kw.fsf@gnu.org> <87tv5h7t0j.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59199) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ilzGs-0004Al-OK for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 12:56:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ilzGr-0006G1-Om for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 12:56:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:55602) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ilzGr-0006Fu-Lc for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 12:56:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ilzGr-0006sg-L5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 12:56:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87tv5h7t0j.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: GNU Guix maintainers , 38529@debbugs.gnu.org Hey! On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 at 16:06, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > zimoun skribis: > > On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 at 11:35, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote= : > > Is this statement acted? Is it the consensus by all the maintainers? > > All I=E2=80=99m saying is that what EuAndreh wrote above is correct; I=E2= =80=99m not > stating anything as to what solution we should implement. :-) H=C3=A9h=C3=A9, it is an answer to the questions. ;-) > > Why do you say that "guix shell" does not reflect what the command is a= bout? > > Because the command spawns a new shell with options (expanding it, > > isolating it, etc.) > > The command does not necessarily spawn a new shell; it spawns a command > in a well-defined environment, and that command might be a shell. What about "guix spawn"? All the best, simon