From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pjotr Prins Subject: Re: guix environment Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 07:52:47 +0200 Message-ID: <20150616055247.GA23591@thebird.nl> References: <20150615065554.GA17263@thebird.nl> <20150615191006.GA21528@thebird.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z4joN-00025t-6g for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 01:53:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z4joH-00017E-UA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 01:53:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "Thompson, David" Cc: guix-devel On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 03:22:55PM -0400, Thompson, David wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Pjotr Prins wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:10:15AM -0400, Thompson, David wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:55 AM, Pjotr Prins wrote: > >> > > >> > Would it be OK to add some RUBY paths? > >> > >> What additional Ruby search paths are needed? We already have $GEM_PATH. > > > > $GEM_HOME > > This one doesn't make sense because it specifies where gems are to be > installed. Store items are immutable, so one cannot install gems into > them. We still provide the gem tool ;). If we set this value to something sensible (relative to $HOME) people can still use gems. The current default setting is not good because it does not provide isolation. I realise this may not be a guix concern, but for guix adoption it is good to think about these things. > > $GEM_SPEC_CACHE > > Is this a real search path or can it only point to a single cache > directory? If the latter, it cannot be a native search path in a > package recipe. Same reasoning. We want isolation between different Ruby installations. That is what I do in that script - pick up the HASH and create a path relative to $HOME. If this is what every normal user needs to do, why can't we have guix help out? Ultimately it is part of the Ruby environment we work in - therefore it is the resposibility of the Ruby package. It does away with needing RVM :) We can ignore this point, but it means every user will have to work around it. What is the point of that? Pj.