Re: Emacs on a reMarkable

[Sébastien Lerique]

Hi,

On 21 Sep 2023 at 09:14, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:

> Other said, it seems something about “hash guix“ as probably recommended
> by the message ending “guix pull”. :-)
>

> Well, my guess is that the command “guix” points to the same executable
> (/usr/bin/guix) before and after “guix pull”.  Something like:
>
>     # apt install guix
>     # type -P guix
>     /usr/bin/guix
>
>     # guix pull
>     # type -P guix
>     /usr/bin/guix
>
>     # hash guix
>     # type -P guix
>     ~/.config/guix/current/bin/guix
>

Aha indeed that makes perfect sense! I just re-checked and the two
"hints", including setting PATH after the first guix pull, are exactly
to the point:

root@vm-remarkable2:~# type -P guix
/usr/bin/guix
root@vm-remarkable2:~# GUIX_PROFILE="/root/.config/guix/current"
root@vm-remarkable2:~# . "$GUIX_PROFILE/etc/profile"
root@vm-remarkable2:~# type -P guix
/root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix
root@vm-remarkable2:~# hash guix  # only makes sense after updating PATH
root@vm-remarkable2:~# type -P guix
/root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix

>>> root@arm-vm:~# /usr/bin/guix pack -R -S /emacsbin=bin emacs-no-x
>>> /gnu/store/wpxqqdcslxxx9g9l9j847ifgh0xdlsfl-emacs-no-x-tarball-pack.tar.gz
>>>
>>> root@arm-vm:~# guix time-machine 
>>> --commit=65dcfb3f3865d08467da747041263fd22460d393 \
>>>                -- pack -R -S /emacsbin=bin emacs-no-x
>>> /gnu/store/pszvzh7917kkf1cisxd46bx8vlac25zh-emacs-no-x-tarball-pack.tar.gz
>
> In these two commands, the Guix revision used for producing the tarball
> is explicitly set.  Commit 65dcfb3 is just a recent one – pick the one
> you prefer :-) – the point was to verify you get a different tarball for
> another revision than the “old” one and thus check if the issue is about
> an incorrect configured “guix” command.  Does it make sense?
>

Yes, thanks!

I like the way this reminds me of another aspect of the philosophy where
data and code are not separated. One is (or can be) the other, and which
"guix" binary (or script) is used matters.

Thanks again, and best,
Sébastien