common software

common software

[Marco van Hulten]

Hello—

Is there a meta-package providing for many common utilities like
'file', 'wget', ...?

Even though there is some subjectivity in what is essential software, a
clean installation of GuixSD is very minimal.  Is there a reason for
this?

—Marco

Re: common software

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi Marco,

> Even though there is some subjectivity in what is essential software, a
> clean installation of GuixSD is very minimal.  Is there a reason for
> this?

The reason is primarily that with Guix it is *possible* to do so.  It
allows different users on the same system to have different sets of
software; as you wrote this is a very subjective decision, so we simply
leave it up to the user.

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Re: common software

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

>> Even though there is some subjectivity in what is essential software, a
>> clean installation of GuixSD is very minimal.  Is there a reason for
>> this?
>
> The reason is primarily that with Guix it is *possible* to do so.  It
> allows different users on the same system to have different sets of
> software; as you wrote this is a very subjective decision, so we simply
> leave it up to the user.

Also, I find it more convenient to have applications I use in
~/.guix-profile rather than in the ‘packages’ field of my
‘operating-system’: I can install them, upgrade them, etc. whenever I
want, independently of the system config.

Ludo’.

Re: common software

[myglc2]

On 01/29/2018 at 18:02 Ludovic Courtès writes:

> Hi,
>
> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:
>
>>> Even though there is some subjectivity in what is essential software, a
>>> clean installation of GuixSD is very minimal.  Is there a reason for
>>> this?
>>
>> The reason is primarily that with Guix it is *possible* to do so.  It
>> allows different users on the same system to have different sets of
>> software; as you wrote this is a very subjective decision, so we simply
>> leave it up to the user.
>
> Also, I find it more convenient to have applications I use in
> ~/.guix-profile rather than in the ‘packages’ field of my
> ‘operating-system’: I can install them, upgrade them, etc. whenever I
> want, independently of the system config.

But Ludo’ what is convenient for you is not convenient for the Guix
noob: They are most likely already using a mainstream GNU/Linux distro
on a notebook or desktop. When they try any other distro they expect it
to provide similar stuff to what their distro provided out of the box.
By not doing this we a) fail to meet expectations and b) force them into
the Guix config-o-rama, which, if we are honest, is not friendly: it's
in scheme, far from obvious, and produces errors that helpful only to
someone who already understands Guix.

I remember my own experience 2 years ago: It felt like a religious
purification ritual ;-) What is the benefit of subjecting noobs to this?
Force them onto the Guix path? Send them to Guix boot camp? I don't see
any benefit to the noob of us going this. Do you?

This is why we should change the templates so that GuixSD comes OOTB
with the same stuff as any mainstream distro. IOW, we should quickly get
the noob running GuixSD and only then show them how cool guix-profile
is.

WDYT? - George

Re: common software

[zimoun]

Dear,

I am not using GuixSD, just trying to do some "hello world".
I agree that it is disturbing to not find "classical" tools and to not
feel at home.
But it is because the paradigm is different. And yeah! it is hard to
change of paradigm. :-)
With classical distro, you always need root privileges to
install/remove stuffs. With Guix, you need them only once at install
time.

Why not provide different default flavoured profiles ?
Say, desktop, www, ssh-server, etc. As Debian-installer proposes.

This provides an entry point to learn by examples how to manage
profiles, create ones, etc.
And this allows newcomer as me to be directly reward, lowing the
entrance barrier of a new system.


What do you think ?

All the best,
simon

Re: common software

[Ricardo Wurmus]

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Why not provide different default flavoured profiles ?
> Say, desktop, www, ssh-server, etc. As Debian-installer proposes.

Do you mean like meta packages?  Or GuixSD template configurations?  We
have both: usually we define meta packages for desktop environments or
toolchains; we also provide different template GuixSD configurations
(desktop, lightweight-desktop, and bare-bones).

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Re: common software

[zimoun]

>> Why not provide different default flavoured profiles ?
>> Say, desktop, www, ssh-server, etc. As Debian-installer proposes.
>
> Do you mean like meta packages?  Or GuixSD template configurations?  We
> have both: usually we define meta packages for desktop environments or
> toolchains; we also provide different template GuixSD configurations
> (desktop, lightweight-desktop, and bare-bones).

I was thinking about template configurations.
Apologies. I did not dived enough carefully into.
Because of your previous message, I will give a look with fresh eyes.

All the best,
simon

Re: common software

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 339 bytes --]

The gnome metapackage eventually should contain the GNOME core apps.

https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2017/08/13/gnome-3-26-core-applications/

Some of these such as GNOME Logs need adaptation for GuixSD, so this
will take some time.

I do not know which apps are “core” for other desktop environments.

Regards,
Florian

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: common software

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi George,

> But Ludo’ what is convenient for you is not convenient for the Guix
> noob: They are most likely already using a mainstream GNU/Linux distro
> on a notebook or desktop. When they try any other distro they expect it
> to provide similar stuff to what their distro provided out of the box.
> By not doing this we a) fail to meet expectations and b) force them into
> the Guix config-o-rama, which, if we are honest, is not friendly: it's
> in scheme, far from obvious, and produces errors that helpful only to
> someone who already understands Guix.

Re errors: recently this has greatly been improved.  I’m now told that
I probably forgot to include a certain module, and how I can fix it.
Granted, simple syntax errors aren’t reported nicely, but that’s a
problem in Guile (and there’s a bug report for it).

But that’s beside the point: users who install software they need into
their user profile do not do this in the operating system configuration!
So they don’t have to touch it at all to get things like “file” or
“wget”.

I also think you’re greatly exaggerating the “unfriendliness” of Guix
configuration.

> This is why we should change the templates so that GuixSD comes OOTB
> with the same stuff as any mainstream distro. IOW, we should quickly get
> the noob running GuixSD and only then show them how cool guix-profile
> is.

Guix is all about user freedom.  Providing a bigger set of defaults
isn’t really helping, because then we’re then telling other people to
remove the packages from their configs if they don’t like them.  I much
prefer a constructive approach where you *add* what you want rather than
remove what you find was installed without your knowledge.

We already have configuration templates for different systems:
bare-bones, lightweight-desktop, and desktop.  We could add more:
audio-workstation (for common recording tools, preconfigured JACK, and
some extra kernel settings), graphics-workstation (blender, gimp,
imagemagick, etc), … But I’d leave that up to whoever feels like
maintaining and testing these templates.

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net

Re: common software

[myglc2]

Hi Ricardo,

On 01/29/2018 at 20:14 Ricardo Wurmus writes:

> Hi George,
>
>> But Ludo’ what is convenient for you is not convenient for the Guix
>> noob: They are most likely already using a mainstream GNU/Linux distro
>> on a notebook or desktop. When they try any other distro they expect it
>> to provide similar stuff to what their distro provided out of the box.
>> By not doing this we a) fail to meet expectations and b) force them into
>> the Guix config-o-rama, which, if we are honest, is not friendly: it's
>> in scheme, far from obvious, and produces errors that helpful only to
>> someone who already understands Guix.
>
> Re errors: recently this has greatly been improved.  I’m now told that
> I probably forgot to include a certain module, and how I can fix it.
> Granted, simple syntax errors aren’t reported nicely, but that’s a
> problem in Guile (and there’s a bug report for it).
>
Yes it has been improved.

> But that’s beside the point: users who install software they need into
> their user profile do not do this in the operating system configuration!
> So they don’t have to touch it at all to get things like “file” or
> “wget”.
>
Good point. But if they want wget to appear at startup in a user
account, adding it to system config is the only way to go, right?

> I also think you’re greatly exaggerating the “unfriendliness” of Guix
> configuration.
>
OK, I reread it. I apologize for "config-o-rama". SORRY ;-( Otherwise I
think I was being pretty objective.

>> This is why we should change the templates so that GuixSD comes OOTB
>> with the same stuff as any mainstream distro. IOW, we should quickly get
>> the noob running GuixSD and only then show them how cool guix-profile
>> is.
>
> Guix is all about user freedom.  Providing a bigger set of defaults
> isn’t really helping, because then we’re then telling other people to
> remove the packages from their configs if they don’t like them.  I much
> prefer a constructive approach where you *add* what you want rather than
> remove what you find was installed without your knowledge.
>
> We already have configuration templates for different systems:
> bare-bones, lightweight-desktop, and desktop.  We could add more:
> audio-workstation (for common recording tools, preconfigured JACK, and
> some extra kernel settings), graphics-workstation (blender, gimp,
> imagemagick, etc), … But I’d leave that up to whoever feels like
> maintaining and testing these templates.

Yes, global packages are against the Guix mantra ;-) But it is easier
for a noob to remove them than add them. So, IMO we should err on the
side of putting more in the template with comments saying, effectively,
"these are training wheels to be removed once you learn to ride Guix."