guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[bug#36093] [PATCH 2/2] pack: Add '--entry-point'.


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: [bug#36093] [PATCH 2/2] pack: Add '--entry-point'.
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 22:27:27 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux)

Hello,

Danny Milosavljevic <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Tue,  4 Jun 2019 23:01:15 +0200
> Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>> +                   ,@(if entry-point
>> +                         `(;; This one if for Singularity 2.x.
>> +                           "-p"
>> +                           ,(string-append
>> +                             "/.singularity.d/actions/run s 777 0 0 "
>> +                             (relative-file-name "/.singularity.d/actions"
>> +                                                 (string-append #$profile 
>> "/"
>> +                                                                
>> entry-point)))
>> +
>> +                           ;; This one is for Singularity 3.x.
>> +                           "-p"
>> +                           ,(string-append
>> +                             "/.singularity.d/runscript s 777 0 0 "
>> +                             (relative-file-name "/.singularity.d"
>> +                                                 (string-append #$profile 
>> "/"
>> +                                                                
>> entry-point))))
>
> Hmm, 777 (anyone can write)?  It it necessary?

For a symlink it doesn’t matter, AIUI.

> Also, in general, do we conflate "squashfs" and "singularity"?  It has been
> that way in guix/scripts/pack.scm's squashfs-image before this patch already
> and a few extra files can't hurt, but we could also just provide a
> function "singularity-image" or something.

Yes, we do conflate Singularity and Squashfs, but I think there’s no
other “container tool” that uses Squashfs anyway.

We could rename it to “singularity”, but it turns out Singularity 3.x
has its own image format unimaginatively called SIF, so perhaps we’re
better off with the status quo.

Thoughts?  Ricardo?

Thanks,
Ludo’.





reply via email to

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