Ludovic Courtès (2014-08-13 20:03 +0400) wrote:

> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>
> [...]
>
>> (I excluded “upgrade” part as it's the same as “install”, and
>> ‘show-transaction’ is almost the same as ‘show-what-to-remove/install’
>> from "package.scm".)
>
> Yes.
>
> Could you turn the above thing into a patch with a commit log?  Bonus
> points for ‘manifest-perform-transaction’ unit tests.  Make sure to add
> a copyright line for yourself in profiles.scm.
>
> And then a second patch to actually use it in (guix scripts package)
> would be wonderful.  :-)

Ok, I'm attaching these patches.  But there are several issues there:

- I fixed a typo in "tests/profiles.scm" (“profile” -> “profiles”) – Is
  it ok to do this in that commit or should there be a separate commit?

- I added a copyright line to the test file as well.  Is it ok?

- The main thing: look at ‘manifest-show-transaction’ – unlike
  ‘show-what-to-remove/install’ it doesn't display an output path of a
  package item, because a store should be used for that.  So is it
  acceptable or should something be changed there?

> In the next iteration, ‘show-what-to-remove/install’ should report
> packages that are going to be upgraded (by checking among ‘install’
> those are already in the manifest.)

I'll try to do this.

>> Also I think "guix.el" should check for freshness too, so
>> ‘check-package-freshness’ should probably be exported.
>
> Yes, probably in the (gnu packages) module?

Probably, but I think I'm not competent to decide :)