From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 0FRaHEf55V5/bQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 10:17:43 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id cE83GEf55V6fKAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 10:17:43 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31E429403EE for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 10:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:46096 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jkPhu-0005f1-6t for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 06:17:42 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33656) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jkPhl-0005eo-9Y for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 06:17:33 -0400 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.193]:25831) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jkPhj-0002GD-0L; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 06:17:32 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 92.169.129.147 Received: from mimimi (lfbn-idf2-1-1315-147.w92-169.abo.wanadoo.fr [92.169.129.147]) (Authenticated sender: mail@ambrevar.xyz) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AC84240002; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 10:17:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Pierre Neidhardt To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , elaexuotee@wilsonb.com Subject: Re: Using --manfistest with /manifest files In-Reply-To: <87v9juwvn0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <338KGSFKQGP1E.23382XUCMS8T3@wilsonb.com> <87v9juwvn0.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 12:17:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87d062ne8a.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.183.193; envelope-from=mail@ambrevar.xyz; helo=relay1-d.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/14 05:26:21 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -5 X-Spam_score: -0.6 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=1, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.11 X-TUID: tooPwVIdhW2I --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hi, Indeed, that was discussed at length but we still need to reach a consensus :) I personally disagree with the --export-manifest suggestion (which may be one of the reasons why this is stalling :p). Links to the related discussions (lots to read in there!): - Store channel specification in profile: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-11/msg00464.html In particular, from there: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2020-02/msg00047.html While I'm at it, Ludo, if you want to continue the discussion, we've left it on Feb 25th with this question from me to you: > I didn't understand from your previous message which downside you find > to embedding the specifications.scm file. It would save efforts to the > user and be more systematic, in the sense that it gives a guarantee to > the user that a specifications.scm corresponds to a profile. This last > point, I believe, is crucial. Cheers! -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEUPM+LlsMPZAEJKvom9z0l6S7zH8FAl7l+TYACgkQm9z0l6S7 zH9GfggAq96LPWjs+0rtvgg2H1AqPy15J83gvmt21j+G3q+GXsiSj+VeDnLThhQR EgUAIQRdp0X7Wl2yKFTmhN1qSVKj+iYcVASnpof1vTtbk5CA1MWxALhA5HIsXJK5 YnNROHEe1PpLCdaID1cJVCEZOg0IaQq3PBKwTu77JdR4pL3qVlrlMrQTZMciD5jz 89+jmQ+Klgag2Cm/jyBpD7m/yrez1XXuV6s5b8yMGrGb5Y1CNEHdkt4TJYrvSCUI nrPPUflPXCjYsfd+IoQAWwxRxykfR5j1olAh5v18EySfVQ+HsZWQ+SIwPr2Q3W+L 3qYOzFkczhRk94o1Wnrh7/vKOEiwkg== =o5+Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--