[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ‘guix environment’ vs. ‘.bash_profile’

From: Danny O'Brien
Subject: Re: ‘guix environment’ vs. ‘.bash_profile’
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 14:22:14 -0700
User-agent: mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 27.1

Brendan Tildesley <> writes:

Doom Emacs has a tool `doom doctor' for diagnosing common errors. Perhaps there could be a `guix doctor' that would check for such things. `guix offload test' is already somewhat like that but for offloading, althought it could improve. Any bug report from a user where the solution is to tell them to fix their environment instead of changing guix could also have a check added to guix doctor. Also, we could collect knowledge on aspects of GNU/Linux that are unique to Guix that one often doesn't learn about on other distributions and include a page in the manual. for example I never had any use for sudo -E or sudo -i
until I started using Guix.

I was going to suggest the same thing -- a "guix doctor" would have helped me a great deal when I was struggling to set up guix at the very

Also because I share my shell and other configuration files across
distributions, it's not uncommon for me to fix something in another distribution which causes repeated trouble in guix (or vice-versa!). So a program that I could repeatedly re-run to identify a root cause (or even run as a test to check that a change doesn't break guix) would be great. Just something that can tell you "oh, your environment variables aren't what I would expect, here is what I think may be wrong" would be
very useful.

Another quick note: I've noticed a trend in a few FLOSS projects of spending some concentrated time on improving the usability of error
messages. Elm and Rust are two examples that spring to mind. The
strategy appears to be to collect common mistakes and their errors, and then iterate on making the error messages not only clearer about what has happened, but also provide concrete suggestions on what can be done to fix the problem -- to the extent of even providing suggested commands
that would correct the error.

I find Guix error messages to be very good on the whole, but I wonder if the strong connection between Guix and Guile might serve us well here.
Clearer error messages in the REPL, informed by Guix usage and
implemented by improving Guile error reporting, would benefit both
immensely. And I think it might makes sense to do this in tandem with a
more reactive "guix doctor" project.

I'm not a great coder, but I make a lot of common mistakes, so happy to
help in that respect!


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]