From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tanguy Le Carrour Subject: Re: User shell: state or config? Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:18:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20190426201818.4vw3ycp6ep4i3zjd@melmoth> References: <874l6mpduo.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51422) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hK7Ie-00060B-8l for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:18:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hK7Id-0007aM-Ax for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:18:24 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874l6mpduo.fsf@gnu.org> 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: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Guix-devel Hello Guix! Le 04/25, Ludovic Courtès a écrit : > We recently discussed handling of the ‘shell’ field of ‘user-account’: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2019-04/msg00171.html Thanks for taking the time to think about it! :-) > Considering user shells as state seemed like a good idea > […] > All in all, I’m in favor of switching back to the previous behavior I don't yet understand the consequences of this choice, so I don't have an opinion on this. For instance, I don't yet understand why, on my system, two shells installed "system wide" with `guix system reconfigure` (namely bash and fish) don't have the same "type" of path [1]? I was expecting fish to be in the `/run/current-system/profile/bin/` folder. And what about the second bash?! [1]: from `/etc/shells` /run/current-system/profile/bin/bash /gnu/store/qn1ax1fkj16x280m1rv7mcimfmn9l2pf-bash-4.4.23/bin/bash /gnu/store/9r5z8k0p0ilmg8qfyc82x11ybacawfqa-fish-3.0.2/bin/fish Best regards -- Tanguy