[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#41428] [PATCH 0/5] Wrappers for c compilers
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
[bug#41428] [PATCH 0/5] Wrappers for c compilers |
Date: |
Wed, 27 May 2020 23:01:57 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Ryan Prior <rprior@protonmail.com> skribis:
> My use-case, my vision, is that I want to provide end-users an environment
> manifest such that `guix environment -m build-env.scm` sets everything up so
> that `make && make check` succeed.
>
> I created these wrappers in service of this vision, to save end-users the
> trouble of creating and managing aliases on a per-environment basis when they
> already don't have to do that using the working set they're familiar with. I
> want to position Guix as a total win for tooling simplicity; but a lot of
> small complexities, each of which is easily worked-around, add up quickly to
> undermine my message.
>
> I would lose all interest in this patch set if I had a more general purpose
> way of extending a manifest with more things than just packages. I picture,
> for example, a manifest with three parts:
>
> - packages
> - env variables
> - aliases
>
> Right now afaict a manifest only has the first of those things. Given I've
> got this nice packagehammer, I'm inclined to insist upon the usefulness of
> this patch set as a means of turning `cc` into a nail.
I understand your goal and I agree that it’s good to avoid building a
pile of small complexities that all add up.
I don’t think lack of ‘cc’ is one them though. First, because it’s a
developer tool, and developers will know they can type ‘gcc’, ‘clang’,
or whatever, create an alias, etc. Second, because most build systems
(Autoconf-generated ‘configure’ scripts, CMake) accommodate the lack of
‘cc’, which thus goes unnoticed.
My 2¢!
Ludo’.