How can I test better?

How can I test better?

[Nils Gillmann]

Regarding:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-02/msg00313.html

I wonder how I can be sure if `guix environment` does not give me
a 100% reproduction of what is happening with the files later on,
how can I verify what I push as patch does work and which doesn't
if I have to write the install procedure of `make` myself?
Is `guix system vm` better?
How can I test things *better* to give me expected results?

I referenced the thread because this is currently broken because
of this one issue.
-- 
ng

Re: How can I test better?

[Leo Famulari]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 01:52:19AM +0100, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> Regarding:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-02/msg00313.html
>
> I wonder how I can be sure if `guix environment` does not give me
> a 100% reproduction of what is happening with the files later on,
> how can I verify what I push as patch does work and which doesn't
> if I have to write the install procedure of `make` myself?
> Is `guix system vm` better?
> How can I test things *better* to give me expected results?

`guix environment` launches a new shell. It's possible to get unexpected
problems if you set environment variables in .bashrc, which is sourced
when launching interactive shells, rather than .bash_profile, which is
only sourced for login shells. This is why it's generally recommended to
set environment variables only when launching login shells.

I'm not sure what happened with lispf4 but that is one way that `guix
environment` can be broken.

You might also try the --pure and --container options to `guix
environment`, since they achieve greater degrees of isolation from the
rest of your system.