From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59094) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iudKA-0001hl-9s for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 09:19:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iudK8-0000Yj-6E for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 09:19:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <875zh3w3yp.fsf@elephly.net> <87v9p2uy0g.fsf@elephly.net> In-Reply-To: <87v9p2uy0g.fsf@elephly.net> From: zimoun Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:18:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: How to install GWL? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gwl-devel-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "gwl-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org Hi Ricardo, On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 14:02, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > I believe that by spawning =E2=80=9Cguix repl=E2=80=9D and using it as an= inferior we > can remove the confusion, and we would make the separation of what is > library code and what is run-time code clearer. I think we agree on a clear separation between what is library code and what is run-time code. I trust you that "guix repl" should fit the needs. My concern is: - 'guix describe' or 'guix --version' returns the current usable Guix - 'guix workflow' depends on the 2 versions of Guix when it was installed: + version of all the building machinery + and this version can be different of the version of Scheme library as inputs - 'guix pull' modifies the result of 'guix describe' or 'guix --version' - then 'guix workflow' refers to 3 versions of Guix: + the 2 above + the current version from which the packages are fetched This happens all the times when using any package and I am not confused. Because the separation between install-time and run-time is clear. Note that the 2 first version are linked so it is not an issue and the version of Guix when installing GWL is enough for reproducibility because this very version implies the other one. However, it still can be confusing because 2 versions of Guix are required for reproducibility. The version to build GWL itself and the version at run-time. In 'guix workflow', the first term 'guix' refers to one version of Guix and the second term 'workflow' refers to another one. What you are proposing probably address well my concern. :-) > Currently, that=E2=80=99s not what we=E2=80=99re doing. Instead we use G= uix as a > library (whatever version of the =E2=80=9Cguix=E2=80=9D package is availa= ble in the > version of Guix used), and *also* use that version to install software. > That=E2=80=99s clearly not desirable, hence my email. I agree. And I agree too that "inferior" seems the right approach. Cheers, simon