Hi,

Previously, you wrote that people need to write shell wrappers.

>> [ cross-profile installation things ]
> The solution to that would be evaluating the search paths over all
> enabled packages.  However, I do think it's fine to do as we did
> before for now; people are already used to this aspect of Guix, _but
> the fact that they need to code up their own shell wrappers to manage
> multiple profiles is not good optics imo_.

(emphasis mine)  However, now you write that the mechanism already exists,
all the user needs to do is "source .../etc/profile.sh", without any shell
wrappers.

Am Donnerstag, dem 05.05.2022 um 13:05 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos:
> > Liliana Marie Prikler schreef op zo 03-10-2021 om 12:50 [+0200]:
> > > On init/reconfigure, `guix home' creates/updates all
> > > home-profiles
> > > which have a home-profile-manifest that is not #f and links them
> > > to
> > > the appropriate locations.  It also creates a shell startup
> > > script
> > > that loads those profiles that are enabled?, even if they have no
> > > manifest (this can be used to e.g. declare a pull profile, which
> > > `guix home' can't manage).  
> > 
> > I assume there will be some mechanism to load disabled profiles
> > (otherwise the disabled profiles seem a bit pointless to me, why
> > not remove them with #; and avoid some build time)?
> This mechanism already exists, it's source
> /path/to/profile/etc/profile.sh.

But IIUC, "source .../etc/profile.sh" is not sufficient because of the
search paths issue, so people need shell wrappers to make sure all search
paths are set?  This seems contradictory to me.  Or am I mistaken on which
shell wrappers you were referring to?

Greetings,
Maxim