From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38686) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1esc41-0008Dm-Gu for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 17:25:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1esc3y-0001zq-97 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 17:25:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:36892) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1esc3y-0001zk-5x for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 17:25:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1esc3x-0000WG-Uu for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 17:25:01 -0500 Subject: [bug#30256] [PATCH 3/3] scripts: environment: Add --no-cwd. Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <87vag2wopo.fsf@gnu.org> <7bc71eaa3cff48ec7dc0d4fe406dde9482b716a9.1516937216.git.mtg@gnu.org> <87tvtyhhnd.fsf@gnu.org> <877equgxx7.fsf@gnu.org> <87zi3p9q1w.fsf@gnu.org> <87y3j7btwp.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2018 23:24:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87y3j7btwp.fsf@gnu.org> (Mike Gerwitz's message of "Sun, 04 Mar 2018 13:03:02 -0500") Message-ID: <87tvtv32ec.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Mike Gerwitz Cc: 30256@debbugs.gnu.org Heya, Mike Gerwitz skribis: > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 15:44:43 +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: [...] >> Sure. I think the issue of least-authority execution of programs >> remains open anway. Do we want a =E2=80=98guix run=E2=80=99-like comman= d? Something in >> the shell, but which shell(s) then? Automatically-generated wrappers so >> we don=E2=80=99t depend on specific shells? > > One thing in particular about using `guix environment --ad-hoc' that is > particularly unfortunate with how I'm abusing it is that it will build > new derivations as necessary (as it is supposed to). So "starting > icecat" in a container isn't just that. I recently upgraded Guix, and > icecat isn't available on Hydra yet, so I'm unable to start icecat at > all until it compiles, which is hours on an X200 (though I'm assuming > that reverting ~/.config/guix/latest might allow me to work around it > temporarily with an old version). This would not have been a problem > with a normal icecat installation in my profile. Right. The =E2=80=98guix run=E2=80=99 script I sent doesn=E2=80=99t try to= build things; it just takes whatever is in $PATH (which has to be in the store, ultimately) and runs it. > Obviously the desirable behavior is to just containerize whatever is in > your profile, if possible. Maybe the script you sent me does just > that. I'm excited to play around with it, I just can't atm. :( You still have to explicitly run =E2=80=98guix run icecat=E2=80=99, which i= sn=E2=80=99t great: if you=E2=80=99re using GNOME Shell and clicking on the icon, you don=E2=80= =99t get to run it in a containerized environment. Ludo=E2=80=99.