Re: Proposal for a blog contribution on reproducible computations

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

I had missed that message.

Konrad Hinsen <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Another thing that comes to mind: would it make sense to mention ‘guix
>> graph’ in the part where you pipe the output of ‘guix show’ to ‘recsel’,
>> etc.?
>
> Forgot that one, sorry. Yes, it would make sense, though I'd place it a
> bit later in the text. But I'd have to figure out first how how the
> various options of "guix graph" relate exactly to what I am writing.
>
>   ‘package’
>        This is the default type used in the example above.  It shows the
>        DAG of package objects, excluding implicit dependencies.  It is
>        concise, but filters out many details.
>
> Are "implicit dependencies" those added by the build system? If yes,
> this edges in this graph would correspond to package-direct-inputs.

Exactly.

>   ‘bag’
>        Similar to ‘bag-emerged’, but this time including all the bootstrap
>        dependencies.
>
> And that is package-closure with arrows defined by bag-direct-inputs, right?

Yes.

Thanks,
Ludo’.