From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id aGGiNMGRYmMrzAAAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 16:50:25 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id cM5fNMGRYmOJJAAAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 16:50:25 +0100 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 833B938DCF for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:50:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oqG0E-0002Om-TF; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:50:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oqG0C-0002Oa-7n for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:50:04 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oqG0A-00020H-Nz for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:50:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oqG0A-0002Bi-DP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:50:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package. Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 15:50:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 58583 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Cc: "\(" , 58583@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer Received: via spool by 58583-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B58583.16674041898386 (code B ref 58583); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 15:50:02 +0000 Received: (at 58583) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2022 15:49:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47001 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oqFzw-0002BC-UJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:49:49 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com ([209.85.221.42]:36815) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oqFzv-0002Aw-CD for 58583@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:49:47 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id j15so25176968wrq.3 for <58583@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=EIvm85RcfVfX5IkYUaDQg8U/KBgHE0GLalaAM6QDx+I=; b=DuCZ7daHpnqB2ZSs86apzu9ytIYC1u52LgCR1XBA3JIUIsMrE7biGuwmJpSu2t++VE udOmB+Q1gvqyXE9mzX9eWICP3mADumMw+jA8YOK1iQGEFKl+9DH5acssYveLsh2aTu9N 8yPDSoQiQLBPwtp+5uJzL6EBx4b/C9DHLzPo1+3TMmMmUwBJ6QIOqOnPIeBzuiKyWD+i HjwIYODpn0Q8dinhPk2i5PplSthogMMwZWwcJqrAx+v5PiLblWMjQGO3FNuBY8El7PBi ttn1XOuklmxWNstYP1j5OVRVpmwSx1KLt3EqHHsReZLOa8w44fEryZs0HzI2EgXhvMvA BRdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EIvm85RcfVfX5IkYUaDQg8U/KBgHE0GLalaAM6QDx+I=; b=eP7nq/Y0tkqhTBqZRq/jj74f2bVq6MH52eitvzxxSW6P4TfHFT6JrRXGEbhsob0MBt DpEC5JWKmqHxqNeXsJMLep172L4oklY9FwpJdUOAzfHZ1inG/i0eIRdYBE1kIrk7tdNi tfFDgWIv8V9tlIsKMvzOvKEeLj4sT8o6nwc5fcmktzuWD5nCX9YVZg6MDD4nwjCBCUc+ EFc1LVfdmuvNIzqbgGy2vKnRch4M8pNYtdSn/xxvRzM07o0wM2pS8KAmjuKHbH6Rj/6o ETKkXtCnv4yLpZ9rZjODDQPTLz+O3rhv3h7nRF73En//6APW2IJIe+DKlcyymxujTzJc QLgA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1/LHYl9krRyC80uIL+urxwcosv3QnVlOPC2ABj6vNADkCLGuv2 iGxucyyc4R59ipKmlIpwq6A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7+RCjAQ4Q5/3LbJo38pynmQyDoXvrx8HWlxEADiaZObPhTZe4EqoGd5OlvWgQxZpFFV4+mtw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:598d:0:b0:236:8ef5:867d with SMTP id n13-20020a5d598d000000b002368ef5867dmr15315152wri.162.1667404181365; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j7-20020a05600c190700b003b477532e66sm3414582wmq.2.2022.11.02.08.49.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:49:41 -0700 (PDT) From: zimoun In-Reply-To: <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx> References: <20221017121642.15468-1-paren@disroot.org> <20221017165057.15648-1-paren@disroot.org> <874jw2l3m6.fsf@gmail.com> <87ilk5hw3g.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <86a65g8k9a.fsf@gmail.com> <874jvhh92c.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1st4fli.fsf@nckx> Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 16:48:49 +0100 Message-ID: <8735b1e4ri.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Guix-patches" Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1667404225; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=EIvm85RcfVfX5IkYUaDQg8U/KBgHE0GLalaAM6QDx+I=; b=MK6pXwyvyDxNhJSsuzdfz2s4v9HKScPLhOcw6UxBmMcDyt5fih2W1ZOtlMaV7Zf1vITp2k q3IvFxjbNaRRpMRcMSA9R2EnVE05TS2rJjgeSoYXDtor9pmVvxhKnI/EDSyTiB/Eh32SvU Q0BkcKNubqYGssbWZ5L08TumWv98heDz66MQCbGsYE4m+d1JQQ/gGxzs1+2DGz4N6u0mW9 NsGViSkR9cQx2HRoCkPqVfPZUKG1j3PtdFO+d4WoSCDAL6bzb+2X45JnifDzgW3zbZ3AsZ f6mrmo9TT7LlvjYsyztIWRiV9ldsgzClF+g9JdyhdKe7TWQ7bLSY87onT7jq8g== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1667404225; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=syAD3K05Kym21uyOxuskawGOn3nJEq2uhCHdqD+TgPPM/LlmjW9QaSM5uetF2jQjjjgrG6 LbKDZ4ZKHfHioGvLSYR8gj4PPIAaYDcQKZnx3dngunZSwLN4bA32mqDVKNtIalK6jXGOZj kvlt3cn/VcPyL22VsM6Bv5EfRQpnVkbttJhBV+ieLp3dGH21wRcUey44f3N87GdnBhCYGJ pRn1WAvHW3pspSZ2vKE1JiFDapph+BXthyaWoyttYFlNKTh0GTaBIdNdC0g8JqavRLhR2y Zw7Jcc9DisQQIPRaJoChQ67XAT3CBtOaOJgW9EeQ7gaYD9TMyS005p/FDlLsWA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=DuCZ7daH; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 8.21 X-Spam: Yes Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=DuCZ7daH; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 833B938DCF X-Spam-Score: 8.21 X-Migadu-Spam: Yes X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: yQSIn7ELYLnp Hi Tobias, On mer., 02 nov. 2022 at 14:19, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via = wrote: > Thanks for the clarifications! I hope you don't feel like you=20 > were dragged into a discussion against your will. If so, I really=20 > do apologise. > > I think all intentions here were the opposite: to make sure that=20 > even a =E2=80=98weak=E2=80=99 opinion was properly considered. It might = turn out=20 > to be more robust than the =E2=80=98strong=E2=80=99 ones ;-) That's one = of Guix's=20 > strengths IMO. For sure. :-) Well, we agree that many people are confused by 1. which version of Guix they are running, 2. the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 which time to time is installe= d with a wrong understanding about what it is. And we agree that the patch is a way to address that. We also agree that raising a message when running =E2=80=9Cguix install guix=E2=80=9D (wh= atever the profile) is an appropriate mean to address the issue. Where we disagree is only if the message must be an error stopping any other actions or if the message must be a warning =E2=80=93 letting people = shoot in their foot if they really want to, fully being aware that they could be burnt. Yours arguments are not convincing me that an error is adequate because I am raising corner cases (e.g., guix as a Guile library). And you are not convinced by my arguments, pointing that are not worth the exception. Well, let agree that we disagree and move forward. :-) I rally to the proposal about put an error. At worse, there is many workarounds for people really wanting the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 in some prof= ile. :-) Just other minor comments =E2=80=93 because now I am dragged into a discuss= ion against my will ;-) =E2=80=93 so let keep my opinion as clear as I am able = to. > zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >> Therefore, why do we provide the =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99 package in the f= irst=20 >> place? > > That =E2=80=98guix install guix=E2=80=99 is an error does *not* imply tha= t the=20 > mere existence of the =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 package is an error. I thin= k we can=20 > keep those separate. We agree that =E2=80=9Cguix install guix=E2=80=9D is most of the time an er= ror and an user=E2=80=99s misunderstanding. We want address the confusion and one par= t of the confusion is from the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99. Therefore,= it appears to me a question: why do we provide the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80= =99 in the first place? This is a honest question. Maybe this patch is not addressing at the correct level the source of the confusion. And maybe the fix should be at another level. Aside some corner cases as described elsewhere (guix as a Guile library), why do we need to provide a package named =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99?= In order to allow, guix shell -D guix for feeding a development environment for Guix. Something else? Somehow, my point is not to imply that the package named =E2=80=99guix=E2= =80=99 is an error but instead to think if we really need this package named =E2=80=99gu= ix=E2=80=99. >> Well, maybe instead the package =E2=80=99guix=E2=80=99, it should be ren= amed >> =E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=99guile-libguix=E2=80=99. > > That would be going against the spirit of our own naming rules,=20 > unless you mean that it should be a =E2=80=98library-only=E2=80=99 varian= t that=20 > lacks /bin/guix. Euh, why is it going against the spirit of the naming rules? All Guile packages are prefixed by =E2=80=99guile-=E2=80=99, as Haskell by =E2=80=99g= hc-=E2=80=99, as R by =E2=80=99r-=E2=80=99, etc. And for instance, the package =E2=80=99python-nose=E2=80=99 provides =E2=80= =99bin/nosetests=E2=80=99. Idem for =E2=80=99python-pylint=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=99bin/pylint=E2=80=99; = for the two I quickly found. > Now *that* I do find mildly confusing=E2=80=94but only because it's=20 > starting to get complex :-) Do we then put /bin/guix in=20 > =E2=80=98guix-libguix:bin=E2=80=99? Or a second package? Etc. Here, I am confused. :-) Aside that =E2=80=99guile-guix=E2=80=99 would be a= perfectly fine name, I miss the logic: on one hand a willing to error because =E2=80=99bin/guix=E2=80=99 and on the other hand trying to define various o= utputs to keep such =E2=80=99bin/guix=E2=80=99. Or I miss some humour behind. Cheers, simon