From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Introducing =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBwYWNr4oCZ?= Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:14:40 +0100 Message-ID: <87fui8m3vz.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87d1dodcnb.fsf@gnu.org> <87k27tv5sp.fsf@igalia.com> <87r320m0u5.fsf@gnu.org> <87efy0t0tv.fsf@igalia.com> <87a88n7pwq.fsf@gnu.org> <8737e9dwb9.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <8737e827vv.fsf@gnu.org> <878to0z7wk.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40394) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cpy5B-0005DW-4T for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:14:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cpy56-0002rt-Gg for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:14:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <878to0z7wk.fsf@lupo.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> (Federico Beffa's message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:09:31 +0100") 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" To: Federico Beffa Cc: guix-devel Hi, Federico Beffa skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> Hi Federico, >> >> Federico Beffa skribis: >> >>> Say, developer A distributes such an archive A and developer B >>> distributes archive B (a different program/library) and someone C >>> installs both. >> >> Interestingly composability (what happens when you unpack both A and B >> on the same system) is better than what you=E2=80=99d get with Docker: t= he >> unpacked items that are identical are shared, and those parts that >> differ don=E2=80=99t collide. > > Packs share identical items, but it becomes essentially impossible to > remove one component out of many. Yes, of course. It=E2=80=99s really a frozen system snapshot. >> The intended use case is mostly =E2=80=9Cone-off=E2=80=9D packs where yo= u just want >> people to easily test something, as opposed to putting it in >> production. This was the case for the Guile 2.2.0 release. In those >> cases, people would essentially =E2=80=9Crm -rf /gnu=E2=80=9D when they= =E2=80=99re done. > > If you provide an archive such as > 'guile-2.2.0-pack-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.lz' reachable from the main > project page (especially without any warning about its intended > purpose), I bet that many peoples will install it and keep it. If more > projects follow this example, we land to the above scenario where "rm > -rf /gnu" is not practical at all. I agree, there=E2=80=99s always a risk. I think what we can do is communic= ate about these risks, and avoid using distributing packs in situations that make it too likely that people will keep the pack without ever upgrading. >> For code that is meant to be kept over time, I would recommend to either >> use Guix, or to include Guix in the pack so that people can eventually >> upgrade. > > This is clear to me, but there are many peoples who do not know about > Guix, or just don't want it. They may still be interested in, say, > Guile 2.2. > > With the 'pack' command it seems to me that Guix is being promoted as a > convenient development environment where at the end you can produce > binary bundles for distribution on any system that it supports. But, > without providing at least a way to remove things, it seems to be > heading toward a dangerous direction. Sure. I think it=E2=80=99s a handy but potentially dangerous tool. In my = view the goal is not to promote Guix as a tool to make bundles, but rather allow people to solve problems in specific circumstances, with the above caveats. Those caveats largely apply to other =E2=80=9Capp bundle=E2=80=9D= solutions, and I=E2=80=99d argue that this one is =E2=80=9Cless bad=E2=80=9D that most= other bundling solutions. Thanks for your feedback! Ludo=E2=80=99.