Re: Questions about guix handling emacs packages

[Fredrik Salomonsson <plattfot@gmail.com>]

Hi Zimoun,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> I do not know what rofi is but re-sourcing is faster to check is the
> new change works than any other. :-)

It is just an application launcher, but yes re-sourcing is a bit faster.
:)

> Nice!  Thank you for your contribution.
> As you can seen, add Emacs packages is in general fun and rewarding. :-)
> Do not hesitate to report your difficulties on mailing lists help-guix
> or guix-devel or IRC #guix.

Thank you. Indeed it was. I'm still learning the ropes but got some good
feedback from my first contribution. So I'll continue adding the rest of
the emacs packages that I'm missing.

> Yes, "guix pack" is an an option if your work machine run the Linux
> kernel.  Otherwise, it should be a bazooka to kill a tiny fly. :-)

I'm quite lucky that my work machine is also running the linux kernel.
Although a quite outdated one, it predates user namespaces support. But
yeah, `guix pack` might be a bit overkill.

> However, the main advantage to use for producing your Emacs setup is
> that it is harder to break it and when it did, you can (almost) always
> roll-back.  For example, I track (git) the channel that I used: guix
> describe -f channels > foo.scm && git commit -a and I use manifests
> files tracked too.  Therefore, I can easily use the same setup on
> another machine running Guix or restore previous setup without keeping
> all the generations in the store.  Anyway. :-)

Nice, that is a pretty nice way of having it reproducible. Which my
setup with use-package is not. It is easy to deploy but not to reproduce
it and rolling back is non-existent. So guix ticks all the boxes for me
:).

> Is it fixed now for you?

emacs-magit - yes. emacs-ts is still failing.