From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id lMajCbUz6F4gVgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 02:51:33 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id kFAkBbUz6F7mPgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 02:51:33 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A8AC94013C for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 02:51:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50634 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl1hD-0003yf-DM for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:51:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl1gs-0003yS-Da for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:51:10 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]:46081) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl1gq-0000JH-OR; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:51:10 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id c12so17822253qkk.13; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:51:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZNFRKis6jIPV9xm6iOD9jRh1RdHzGtNiNvnIBPEMjP4=; b=IeGFRLdNBvtg6JKWvARW3MM0t3/OuCd+ZEEB4bGxy5nrZi1yV24h1VoyMhnjG1+Fev rERFwO92cO3P5KtO7OFsbpkbbZ0tCe8c9fFzQDQeU3oPK+ZoYsL2fH2lIQYBC2aDoN4t Fg+7NAhvZF4iXrVGwXQX8ECvgg380xGho0k+wgLpXeqyGXQbskAyIHZ37QluuQ98m0X3 T1G+EV52Qy1FUYkrhzCcnrGF3wZRnf48MeM13zG853wiIoOZknZDuRcJ/iJd6+qb4nSx fttl+YaHqgOAfL/vJL5oq3PW4eKjWSoNjsPkuhx6IxWJkYtww0Mp5dq55W0XrW+b9Z3a 3qVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZNFRKis6jIPV9xm6iOD9jRh1RdHzGtNiNvnIBPEMjP4=; b=g+SixoJ1U4xv1aKiGvqe10ARezEcdiRWwPOX7NXuhfQvgRB2WuRaSSHFtVmwoqDCN9 xm8zFgCbyxzTvTC9Zf2K/oAnaF0QODox02Hqzf8YNUI20SQa9D7hsX+9Vn99yBGJUZiQ sYfLi63/oAqLwzQuyhyhTJN/+fqRKdX5FcO/iC3lg5ZXUAk71z9HhUTU+WSx4Nj1nS/8 ePCbYN+vJk62hV+Uw5DblC3ZSVW9Kb60Jzj7WO5qY/zxXeh4s+htTqUZ5DLRbe5EqsIa ga7BbjqzW79SphSP/yObGwBXI52KwWpebJa8Y+dvviDgThixnMFKfI1YtDZ8IhQKZHPU FvGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533p9Yv5M60uKnwa4S5YhS3jOtjXVd32hmLJbd8wsPgn6Dm243v1 GEW9RxbHruTtMLKuTe2NtA5fJHhJ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJztmIA7SD28cv6VqrHE/GyysIJfLopQ31fmQdiOI1BbCcbv7WQ90sI3W9Rr6jl7vbKCg0vZhA== X-Received: by 2002:a37:9bd7:: with SMTP id d206mr19047140qke.113.1592275866248; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from g1 (c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [73.167.118.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y1sm13879913qta.82.2020.06.15.19.51.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:51:05 -0700 (PDT) References: <338KGSFKQGP1E.23382XUCMS8T3@wilsonb.com> <87v9juwvn0.fsf@gnu.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3 From: George Clemmer To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , elaexuotee@wilsonb.com Subject: Re: Using --manfistest with /manifest files In-reply-to: <87v9juwvn0.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:51:04 -0400 Message-ID: <85ftav206f.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d; envelope-from=myglc2@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk1-x72d.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=IeGFRLdN; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.71 X-TUID: auFedTuLlouf Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > elaexuotee@wilsonb.com skribis: >> First, am I missing something? Is there a better/preferred way to make u= se of >> the `manifest' files in profiles? > You=E2=80=99re not missing anything: it=E2=80=99s a longstanding source o= f confusion > that these =E2=80=98manifest=E2=80=99 files are not like the =E2=80=98man= ifest.scm=E2=80=99 files. > These =E2=80=98manifest=E2=80=99 files are meant for internal consumption. This hurt my head for a while a few years ago until I realized that 'manifest.scm' is the guix "order" and =E2=80=98.guix-profile/manifest=E2= =80=99 is the guix "packing list". But actually a guix' 'manifest' packing list goes well beyond what we normally find in a packing list by containing detailed info about how the specific products were made, down to the specific design for the specific version shipped. Thought of this way it is easy to understand why a receiver of a 'manifest' can only estimate the set of 'manifest.scm' that might produce it. A simple-minded example: did the manifest.scm specify the version of the package shipped or is this an artifact of a) when 'manifest.scm' was processed or b) of the requirements of the other packages that were received? In any event, once I saw it this way it no longer troubled me that guix doesn't have a pushbutton way to "reverse" 'manifest' into 'manifest.scm'. ISTM we set ourselves up for confused users and a lot of explaining by labeling two very different things with same name :-0 Yes, only 'manifest.scm' is in the doc, but '.guix-profile/manifest' smacks a user in the face pretty quickly which leads to these messy questions. IMO we could dramatically simplify the situation, and simplify our lives, by simply renaming the .guix-profile/manifest file ;-) George