> Ah so I was referring to recutils record sets (I thought you were
> talking about SRFI-9 records or something.)  So what’s the question?
> :-)

I was trying to explain why we shouldn’t always output generations in
the recutils format.  It works for ‘--search’ because there’s only one
record.

>> I’m attaching the patch.  Please don’t push it yet.  I’ve just found a
>> bug.  On my machine, ‘guix package -p test -l 2d’ and ‘guix package -p
>> test -l’ should return the same set of generations, but the fourth
>> generation is shown twice in the former case.

> OK.

Fixed, but I found a new one.  We output a human-readable date but
filter generations based on ‘ctime’.  This may cause problems in some
cases.

Let me try to demonstrate the problem.

$ ./pre-inst-env guix package -p test -l

Generation 1	Sep 16 2013
Generation 2	Sep 16 2013
Generation 3	Sep 16 2013
Generation 4	Sep 16 2013
Generation 5	Sep 16 2013
Generation 6	Sep 17 2013

And the last two days:

$ ./pre-inst-env guix package -p test -l 2d
Generation 2	Sep 16 2013
Generation 3	Sep 16 2013
Generation 4	Sep 16 2013
Generation 5	Sep 16 2013
Generation 6	Sep 17 2013

See?  Even though the first five generations have the same date, the
first one is not shown.

I believe that this bug is now fixed.

I incorporated all your suggestions except the following ones.

> I’d use @table rather than @itemize.

IIUC, it can be used only with the following commands: “@code, @samp,
@var, @option, or @kbd.” [1]  Neither command seems to match.

> s/If you pass/Passing/
> s/will return/specifies/

This doesn’t sound right because the other sentences use “will.”

Can I push the attached patch to ‘master’?

[1] https://gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#index-table