From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de>
To: Matt <matt@excalamus.com>
Cc: "Maxim Cournoyer" <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>,
"Christian Miller" <christian.miller@dadoes.de>,
"guix-devel" <guix-devel@gnu.org>,
"Josselin Poiret" <dev@jpoiret.xyz>
Subject: Re: doc: installation: fix ~root confusion (was Re: doc: Removing much of Binary Installation)
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 16:54:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87le6ou5ly.fsf@pelzflorian.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18e280dc65a.fb9272352515573.111358157668309553@excalamus.com> (matt@excalamus.com's message of "Sun, 10 Mar 2024 12:09:35 +0100")
Hi Matt. I would almost want to push your changes, but we still
disagree on some wordings.
Also,
Matt <matt@excalamus.com> writes:
> I realigned the subject. It was previously changed to "doc: Removing
> much of Binary Installation" which is misleading. The topic is how to
> clarify installation based on reported confusion, not about removing
> text. The reported confusion was on the use of '~root'. Explicit
> mention of '~root' is only necessary when the manual details how
> 'guix-install.sh' works. Since 'guix-install.sh' is the recommended
> method of installation, such level of detail is unnecessary,
> inappropriate, and impractical. The suggested changes address the
> issue, only incidentally, by removing text.
Yes, however the removal means that we should move the sections
* 2.2 Requirements
* 2.3 Running the Test Suite
to the Contributing manual in doc/contributing.texi. WDYT? You said,
it could be a separate discussion, but in my opinion it would be part of
the same patch.
> +@cindex foreign distro
> +@cindex Guix System
“@cindex Guix System” is inappropriate, because instructions on Guix
System are not here.
> +You can install the Guix package management tool on top of an existing
> +GNU/Linux or GNU/Hurd system@footnote{Currently only the Linux-libre
> +kernel is fully supported. […]
No.
First of all, using guix-install.sh as per your instructions, one
installs the Guix distribution *and* package management tool. Either
say “You can install the Guix package management tool and distribution”
or “You can install Guix”.
Next, I believe Guix cannot currently be built on existing GNU/Hurd
systems, because guile-fibers does not work. I do not really know
enough, but I would not mention Hurd support. Additionally “only the
Linux-libre kernel” is incorrect, because running Guix on non-libre
Linux is fully supported. Running Guix System there is not supported
(by us).
>> You suggested in your mail:
>>
>> Matt matt@excalamus.com> writes:
>> > Readers interested in those details may read the code for 'guix-install.sh'.
>>
>> Could you add this suggestion to your diff?
>
> I don't see that as relevant to the reader. The ability to read the
> source is implicit in it being provided, which it is.
Yes, you are right.
> The suggested changes remove superfluous commentary on the recommended
> binary installation process which create confusion.
“remove superfluous commentary” could be part of a commit message for
your changes, if you agree.
> What do you think is lost that isn't captured by the following bulleted list?
>
> +The script guides you through the following:
> +@itemize
> +@item Download and extract the binary tarball
> +@item Set up the build daemon
> +@item Make the ‘guix’ command available to non-root users
> +@item Configure substitute servers
> +@end itemize
The list is fine.
>> Therefore, the sentence would have to be removed: “The following
>> sections describe two methods of installation, binary installation
>> and building from source.”
>
> I've removed that sentence for a different reason. I also revised the
> sentence, "This is often quicker than installing from source, which is
> described in the next sections", to simply, "described later".
>
> The reason is that Chapter 2 doesn't currently explain building or
> installing from source. Building and installing from source is
> currently covered much later in Section 22.1. Whether or not the
> Installation section should cover building from source is a separate
> issue and shouldn't be part of this discussion.
This could be:
described later (@pxref{Building from Git}).
>> Matt matt@excalamus.com> writes:
>> > - Add commas in appropriate places; after "For...Ubuntu-based
>> > systems", "Likewise", and the 'or' within the list of substitutes
>>
>> I’m not a native speaker, but I believe the commas are not
>> necessary. There particularly does not need to be an Oxford comma
>> before ‘or’. There could be, but there is no reason to change it.
>
> Ah, the One True Brace Style of natural language :)
>
> I think there's already enough controversy in this thread. I've changed it back :)
:D However, please also do not change:
> -Likewise on openSUSE:
> +Likewise, on openSUSE:
>> Similarly, IMO the nuances are more appropriate in the old wording
>> “For Debian or a derivative such as Ubuntu,” rather than your change
>> “For Debian and Ubuntu-based systems”.
>
> The current wording is, "If you're running Debian or a derivative such
> as Ubuntu..." None of the suggested changes include the wording you
> give.
>
> What are the nuances? If they matter, we should probably make them explicit.
The nuance is that Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian. It can be
bootstrapped with Debian’s dpkg, although I did not follow a recent
e-mail thread on how to do this from a Guix-provided dpkg.
> +@quotation Note
> +By default, binary installations of Guix build @emph{everything} from
> +source. This makes each installation and upgrade very expensive.
> +@xref{On Trusting Binaries} for a discussion of why this is the default.
> […]
> -
> -@quotation Note
> -If you do not enable substitutes, Guix will end up building
> -@emph{everything} from source on your machine, making each installation
> -and upgrade very expensive. @xref{On Trusting Binaries}, for a
> -discussion of reasons why one might want do disable substitutes.
> @end quotation
Better not change the wording? I believe enabling substitutes is not
the default.
IMHO The discussion about whether Upgrading Guix should recommend to
edit the systemd service of the Debian guix package is for a separate
second patch.
Regards,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-11 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-14 15:01 Feedback of the GNU Guix manual Christian Miller
2024-01-15 17:52 ` Matt
2024-01-15 22:05 ` Christian Miller
2024-01-18 19:44 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-01-19 21:01 ` Matt
2024-01-26 23:59 ` Matt
2024-02-18 12:35 ` Matt
2024-02-18 13:55 ` Josselin Poiret
2024-02-21 18:27 ` Matt
2024-02-21 17:20 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-02-21 18:36 ` Matt
2024-02-23 2:46 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-02-23 18:37 ` Matt
2024-03-02 13:34 ` Matt
2024-03-06 17:15 ` doc: Removing much of Binary Installation (was: Feedback of the GNU Guix manual) pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-03-06 19:42 ` Matt
2024-03-06 20:52 ` doc: Removing much of Binary Installation Suhail Singh
2024-03-06 21:18 ` Suhail Singh
2024-03-07 17:03 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-03-10 11:09 ` doc: installation: fix ~root confusion (was Re: doc: Removing much of Binary Installation) Matt
2024-03-10 20:42 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2024-03-10 23:21 ` Suhail Singh
2024-03-11 1:58 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2024-03-11 4:27 ` John Kehayias
2024-03-11 19:15 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2024-03-11 15:54 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) [this message]
2024-03-16 10:47 ` Matt
2024-03-16 14:05 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-03-17 17:34 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-03-06 21:29 ` doc: Removing much of Binary Installation (was: Feedback of the GNU Guix manual) Vagrant Cascadian
2024-04-10 14:05 ` Fix grammar and markup (was " Matt
2024-04-11 12:59 ` Christian Miller
2024-04-12 14:41 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-12 19:18 ` Matt
2024-04-13 12:02 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-14 7:00 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-19 14:09 ` Creating a documentation team? Ludovic Courtès
2024-04-19 15:32 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-04-19 17:32 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-20 8:33 ` Matt
2024-05-01 20:34 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-05-02 9:14 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-12 20:16 ` Fix grammar and markup (was Re: Feedback of the GNU Guix manual) Ludovic Courtès
2024-04-13 8:22 ` Matt
2024-04-13 11:26 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-14 14:50 ` Matt
2024-04-15 12:58 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-15 18:39 ` Matt
2024-04-16 6:43 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-18 17:15 ` Matt
2024-04-19 20:56 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-04-20 8:36 ` Matt
2024-04-17 18:08 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-04-22 18:25 ` [PATCH] Fix typo (Re: " Matt
2024-04-22 22:43 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
2024-05-07 19:41 ` [PATCH] doc: Clarify need to update search paths on foreign distro (was " Matt
2024-05-07 20:41 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2024-05-10 9:57 ` Matt
2024-05-11 8:14 ` pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87le6ou5ly.fsf@pelzflorian.de \
--to=pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de \
--cc=christian.miller@dadoes.de \
--cc=dev@jpoiret.xyz \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=matt@excalamus.com \
--cc=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).