guix: workflow: command not found

guix: workflow: command not found

[Luis Felipe]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 553 bytes --]

Hi,

I'm following the tutorial in the website (https://www.guixwl.org/tutorial), but I get this message when trying to the workflow command:

guix workflow --help
guix: workflow: command not found
Try `guix --help' for more information.

Also, "guix --help" does not list it, but "guix package -I" says it is installed:

gwl 0.4.0 out
/gnu/store/sdl9p9y1kj8macwcz4mjid6m3xd15wzz-gwl-0.4.0

What could this be? I'm using Guix system.


---
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
https://luis-felipe.gitlab.io/

Sent with ProtonMail secure email.

[-- Attachment #1.2: publickey - luis.felipe.la@protonmail.com - 0x12DE1598.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 1815 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 509 bytes --]

Re: guix: workflow: command not found

[Olivier Dion via]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022, Luis Felipe <luis.felipe.la@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm following the tutorial in the website (https://www.guixwl.org/tutorial), but I get this message when trying to the workflow command:
>
> guix workflow --help
> guix: workflow: command not found
> Try `guix --help' for more information.
>
> Also, "guix --help" does not list it, but "guix package -I" says it is installed:
>
> gwl 0.4.0 out
> /gnu/store/sdl9p9y1kj8macwcz4mjid6m3xd15wzz-gwl-0.4.0
>
> What could this be? I'm using Guix system.

I have this `wf-env` script for my research' workflows:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#!/bin/sh

# I assume that you have gwl installed in one of the following profiles.
export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH=$HOME/.guix-home/profile/share/guix/extensions:$HOME/.guix-profile/share/guix/extensions

guix time-machine --channels=./.channels.scm -- $@
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Don't mind the time-machine stuff if you don't need it.  Just replace
the last line with `guix $@` and then `./wf-env workflow run my-wf.w`.

Regards,
old

-- 
Olivier Dion
oldiob.dev

Re: guix: workflow: command not found

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi Luis,

> I'm following the tutorial in the website
> (https://www.guixwl.org/tutorial), but I get this message when trying
> to the workflow command:

The tutorial fails to mention GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH, which needs to be
set to share/guix/extensions, e.g.:

    export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH=$HOME/.guix-profile/share/guix/extensions

Originally I had hoped it would be set automatically due to a search
path specification on the “guix” package, but this doesn’t work as
intended, so it must be set manually.

I’ll amend the documentation / tutorial.

Thanks!

-- 
Ricardo

Re: guix: workflow: command not found

[Luis Felipe]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 614 bytes --]

> Hi Luis,
> 

> > I'm following the tutorial in the website
> > (https://www.guixwl.org/tutorial), but I get this message when trying
> > to the workflow command:
> 

> The tutorial fails to mention GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH, which needs to be
> set to share/guix/extensions, e.g.:
> 

> export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH=$HOME/.guix-profile/share/guix/extensions
> 

> Originally I had hoped it would be set automatically due to a search
> path specification on the “guix” package, but this doesn’t work as
> intended, so it must be set manually.

Okay, now it works :)

Thanks, Ricardo, Olivier.

[-- Attachment #1.2: publickey - luis.felipe.la@protonmail.com - 0x12DE1598.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 1815 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 509 bytes --]

Re: guix: workflow: command not found

[zimoun]

Hi Ricardo,

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 20:07, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

>     export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH=$HOME/.guix-profile/share/guix/extensions
>
> Originally I had hoped it would be set automatically due to a search
> path specification on the “guix” package, but this doesn’t work as
> intended, so it must be set manually.
>
> I’ll amend the documentation / tutorial.

Some time ago, we had this discussion [1]:

        Let take an example, the recent Ludo’s explorer.

          <https://notabug.org/civodul/guix-explorer/>

        It is easy to transform it as an extension and then use “guix explore”.

        But 2 things are strict:

         - user side: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH
         - extensioner side: define-module

        Maybe I am wrong and I miss something.  From my understanding,

         - the file must be located at $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH
         - the module must be defined as (guix extension explore)

        because of:

        --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
            (match (search-path (extension-directories)
                                (format #f "~a.scm" command))
        [...]
               (resolve-interface `(guix extensions ,command)))))
        --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

        So, taking the previous example, it would be easy to say: hey, clone
        this, export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH as /path/to/checkout and run “guix
        explore”.  But, to work, the repo must have the structure:

         - guix-explorer
           - guix
             - extensions
               - explore.scm

        because the module and in the same time $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH must be
        “guix-explore/guix/extensions“.  I feel something is wrong.  And I
        initially proposed to append ’/guix/extensions’ by default to
        GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH in ’extension-directories’.

        I do not understand why it should be a problem.

        BTW, for packages as GWL, it does not change.  It is just an agreement
        between the two sides, right?


        1: <https://yhetil.org/guix/864kimkr96.fsf@gmail.com>

and, from my understanding, the current convention is awkward and I
would prefer the minor tweak I am proposing in Guix side and adjust
accordingly on GWL side.

I would like to document more about extensions because it appears to me
a killer feature but the convention for GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH does not
seem nice and once we will communicate about such extension feature, it
will be impossible to change the convention (because backcompatibility).

WDYT?


Cheers,
simon