From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iKCuKFE2vF68KAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 18:02:57 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id sCnmHGA2vF4PBwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 18:03:12 +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 E4266940B0C for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 18:03:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48652 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvio-0007s3-VM for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:03:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35178) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvig-0007qN-QY for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:03:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:47918) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvig-0007ag-H3 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:03:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvig-0003ZO-EX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:03:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#40549: More usability issues: Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 18:03:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 40549 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Arne Babenhauserheide X-Debbugs-Original-Cc: 40549@debbugs.gnu.org, Tom Zander , bug-guix@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.158939294213032 (code B ref -1); Wed, 13 May 2020 18:03:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2020 18:02:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59462 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvi1-0003Nr-KR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:22 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:46974) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvhz-0003LV-3l for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:19 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35046) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvhy-0007MM-RS for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:18 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]:45275) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYvhv-0007P9-M7 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:18 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id j2so536472qtr.12 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 11:02:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PanJAsMsg1Bzc8/9CrMtESnLTe2HiRJQuudpVdVkbXc=; b=KgkUG4trllimdcHe7jIVoe4LzP7RTvEwjM977tikxOalv46JKNpb4HSRMs/dcV7c41 cTLpYtNJSLBkSG/O6vYaKevJ9yWyjZ3WnMkoy2DlDKwfjSHLIyo5OOiF1tQwdptoJI7G 9zrlRoVLo8w/7JcQcYifZyt3dLOwzVMiOVWtzoS6WU70z+uRT9HyYLEvKOnCNphFrP5d Sb9ObaQeN5ffvewflygkvli5YWnsq+es29/Uttc5oagPDpHIcW8isOWnPL6rnklqQkPf KHQAP6WZGxZbugXxzADT9Kqz/02hnK8nmy4zSHTM0HW7yNvLd0u44sjywCAaiJELruMk KJHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PanJAsMsg1Bzc8/9CrMtESnLTe2HiRJQuudpVdVkbXc=; b=lXYgMVJuo9kNNCEdWx25TMtAzDAsUzJ5v1Z0zfp2wukh6kmOtvxRoB5LAQFnHlJloH j6lLyq8GBmRTzc4Mj3sVNNPKFeRDwRtR7UdlThdT6FGWtc5XkBvUAKsQ1xzSwphEyK1H M3Kacb1muxImsmvt4k6XVKWUA2la8MXlyUSTDeS/V2zJGlqFz5l1zObOwheclqSjEQOf +hAm8DWYiiMUmWRdpE5OTvySMGjUvPaSnQdJJ6Zb2O/K4EbBV8gnmfJxDlRZPbn5+Kiy h8D9JEpTKJjTrH9vRfSzn8OrAymniYCOHEajQks5FpE069RBIRMSOzqZpo3hgv51OCMI htFA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532loasNHJDJ1UpPg/JB+8ovDpbLCx2wdkZryjwVneJZptCNrlfn I5rw1QwsmVCqxBsJ1gH5LTm843VT80fIFEsF5TmzFg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyPEVtUWw4uPWihRtNjgE0CjW7V5z9HbuDonAWAAJulP/idSF/H9MDZrcf/U7Wh0rK/Ur2DZWHpotYBdCqBB/Y= X-Received: by 2002:aed:2d44:: with SMTP id h62mr309688qtd.217.1589392934588; Wed, 13 May 2020 11:02:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6171889.DvuYhMxLoT@cherry> <1804825.CQOukoFCf9@cherry> <5565734.MhkbZ0Pkbq@cherry> <87zhabx0br.fsf@web.de> In-Reply-To: <87zhabx0br.fsf@web.de> From: zimoun Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 20:02:03 +0200 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c; envelope-from=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt1-x82c.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: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 40549@debbugs.gnu.org, tomz@freedommail.ch Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: 0.09 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=KgkUG4tr; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [0.09 / 13.00]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.54003933749341]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.51.188.0/24:c]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; DWL_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[209.51.188.17:server fail]; R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.05), country: US(-0.00), ip: 209.51.188.17(-0.54)]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:-]; MX_GOOD(-0.50)[cached: eggs.gnu.org]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[web.de]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[209.51.188.17:server fail]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:209.51.188.0/24, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[zimontoutoune@gmail.com,bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[209.51.188.17:from]; RCVD_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[10]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[gmail.com : SPF not aligned (relaxed),none] X-TUID: rwVP1nZvnmeJ Dear Arne, On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 18:32, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote= : > And please don=E2=80=99t do radical changes on guix package. That would b= reak > the workflow of every slightly longer term guix user. I do not want to do radical changes. The parser of the command-line is SRFI-37. So it is documented and the command-line follows guide lines that will not change. The change I am asking for is only the short-name option with optional argument. In such case the optional argument is not optional. Other said, the issue is rooted in a bad practise and, AFAIK, Guix does not follow what other GNU tools follow: no short-name with optional argument. And the Guile implementation of SRFI-37 says that the semantic of short-name with optional argument leads to an issue. But now, it is here so what do we do? In the end, there is annoyance. And the goal is to discuss what could be changed to reduce the annoyance, on all sides. For example, I am always annoyed by: guix package -I -p /tmp/profile It would like it works. And to do so, I accept that "guix package -I regexp -p /tmp/profile" does not anymore and would be replaced by "guix package -Iregexp -p /tmp/profile" which already works (as specified by SRFI-37). Today, the Guix manual is lying because the optional argument for short-name is *not* optional depending on its position. And that leads to surprise: guix package -I -p /tmp/profile # fails guix package -p /tmp/profile -I # works And this is really really annoying! It is hard to understand why such different behaviour. Instead of what I am proposing, what do you suggest? Best regards, simon