From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pjotr Prins Subject: Re: Guix on Debian (was: GSoC ideas) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 08:04:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20160224070409.GA10474@thebird.nl> References: <87mvre2eyz.fsf@gnu.org> <87wpqhu0t1.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160208104530.GA26946@crashnator.suse.cz> <87zivbxggp.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87lh6vx9v0.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160208204350.GA29053@thebird.nl> <1456268422.2159.23.camel@ghic.org> <8737sj7znl.fsf@dustycloud.org> <1456273950.2159.35.camel@ghic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60406) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYTVg-0005w1-Ay for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 02:05:24 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYTVb-0005lc-BF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 02:05:20 -0500 Received: from mail.thebird.nl ([95.154.246.10]:40876) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYTVb-0005lO-6E for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 02:05:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1456273950.2159.35.camel@ghic.org> 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: Diane Trout Cc: guix-devel On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 04:32:30PM -0800, Diane Trout wrote: > Also one of your other messages suggested the /gnu directory is also > against Debian policy. > > If there's a way resolve those things, there's probably a much better > chance to get it into Debian. Yes, this in old discussion (also in Nix). For sure, if guix built in /usr/local and $HOME it would be much easier to get by the policy folks (also in HPC environments). There is, however, a good reason to make it a blatant /gnu outside the FHS. The store contains everything that normally goes into the full FHS. It lives outside the FHS. If we make it part of the FHS (even in one subdirectory) it would confuse things badly. I think the clarity matters to system administrators AND users. Also, for true reproducibility, we need one path. Arguably it could be a different one, but to make sure a package is exactly the same in its binary form it needs to be running from a root point. It took me quite some time to come round to this idea. But now I am really convinced it is the only way forward. Administrators can use chroot and containers/VM to mount /gnu - so, there is no real technical concern. Guix is not tied to one server. If they think it important, the Debian people can, at some point, decide to take Guix, create their own caching server, and distribute /usr/local/guix. They have done far more intrusive things ;) For us acceptance in Debian is not a prime concern either. An installable .deb package is good enough to help regular users. Therefore I don't think you need to fix the binary bootstrapping as long as we can make it part of the automated build farm. > But other than that I think my postrm script is incomplete and > certainly needs some more testing but this can certainly turn into > .debs hosted by guix. > > Diane Thanks for the great work! A .deb package would be very useful for people to start using Guix. Pj. --