[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: guix: workflow: command not found
From: |
zimoun |
Subject: |
Re: guix: workflow: command not found |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Apr 2022 11:11:03 +0200 |
Hi Ricardo,
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 20:07, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
> export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH=$HOME/.guix-profile/share/guix/extensions
>
> Originally I had hoped it would be set automatically due to a search
> path specification on the “guix” package, but this doesn’t work as
> intended, so it must be set manually.
>
> I’ll amend the documentation / tutorial.
Some time ago, we had this discussion [1]:
Let take an example, the recent Ludo’s explorer.
<https://notabug.org/civodul/guix-explorer/>
It is easy to transform it as an extension and then use “guix explore”.
But 2 things are strict:
- user side: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH
- extensioner side: define-module
Maybe I am wrong and I miss something. From my understanding,
- the file must be located at $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH
- the module must be defined as (guix extension explore)
because of:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(match (search-path (extension-directories)
(format #f "~a.scm" command))
[...]
(resolve-interface `(guix extensions ,command)))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
So, taking the previous example, it would be easy to say: hey, clone
this, export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH as /path/to/checkout and run “guix
explore”. But, to work, the repo must have the structure:
- guix-explorer
- guix
- extensions
- explore.scm
because the module and in the same time $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH must be
“guix-explore/guix/extensions“. I feel something is wrong. And I
initially proposed to append ’/guix/extensions’ by default to
GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH in ’extension-directories’.
I do not understand why it should be a problem.
BTW, for packages as GWL, it does not change. It is just an agreement
between the two sides, right?
1: <https://yhetil.org/guix/864kimkr96.fsf@gmail.com>
and, from my understanding, the current convention is awkward and I
would prefer the minor tweak I am proposing in Guix side and adjust
accordingly on GWL side.
I would like to document more about extensions because it appears to me
a killer feature but the convention for GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH does not
seem nice and once we will communicate about such extension feature, it
will be impossible to change the convention (because backcompatibility).
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon