From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Wingo Subject: Re: Why does glibc provide bash? Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:21:59 +0200 Message-ID: <877fp25j6g.fsf@igalia.com> References: <87vbcnb2vp.fsf@igalia.com> <871tfapi6h.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36539) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP4pW-0001uP-Jv for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 04:22:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP4pT-0001Jj-EI for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 04:22:42 -0400 Received: from pb-sasl1.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.25]:53497 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP4pT-0001D8-81 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 04:22:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <871tfapi6h.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Tue, 11 Aug 2015 00:23:18 -0400") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Heya Mark, good to see you here too :) On Tue 11 Aug 2015 06:23, Mark H Weaver writes: > Andy Wingo writes: > >> $ ls -l `which bash` >> lrwxrwxrwx 11 root guixbuild 63 Jan 1 1970 /home/wingo/.guix-profile/bin/bash -> /gnu/store/5995q4p9ayvicd8qxjmn8zrwis4y7a8c-glibc-2.21/bin/bash > > Indeed, we should have dealt with this issue long ago, but it seems to > have fallen through the cracks. The following email, including the > quotations, summarizes the problems and possible solutions: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2014-03/msg00349.html I see that glibc depends on static-bash as an input, but why would installing glibc cause me to have a static bash in my profile? Is it because the glibc package installs bash to its $bindir, or because the input is being propagated correctly, or because the input is being propagated incorrectly? I read through the linked mail a few times but if the answer is there, I missed it. The circular dep issue sounds pretty exciting but it seems like there might be another bug here. Dunno. I wonder how Nix deals with this. Andy