On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Mathijs Kwik <math...@bluescreen303.nl>wrote:
> Kirill Elagin <kirela...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Yes, we can nub them (to be precise, it makes sense to subtract > > `systemPackages` from `dbus.packages`), those lists contain > > package names, not derivations. > > Why should systemPackages be subtracted? > There are packages that I want in my path _and_ as a dbus service. > Because packages in `systemPackages` already have their dbus configs enabled just because they are in `systemPackages`. So there is no need to enable their dbus configs through `dbus.packages` logic (otherwise we get this duplication I was talking about). > > > > But, why not simply require all the packages that provide DBus services > to > > be added to `dbus.packages`? That way we avoid duplication and have an > > explicit > > list of packages that have something to do with DBus (it might be useful > in > > the future). > > Adding packages to dbus.packages will cause them to be installed. > I do not want each and every dbus-providing package to get installed and > activated. > I'm not sure what you are talking about. I thought we were talking about NixOS modules. Modules add themselves to `dbus.packages` just like to `systemPackages` conditionally, i.e. if they are enabled. You get those packages installed that correspond to enabled modules, that's how it works. > > > > > > > -- > > Кирилл Елагин > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Mathijs Kwik <math...@bluescreen303.nl > >wrote: > > > >> Vladimír Čunát <vcu...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >> > On 04/07/2014 11:36 AM, Kirill Elagin wrote: > >> >> So, the question is: what is the purpose of having > >> >> services.dbus.packages if those configs are considered anyway due to > >> >> packages being in systemPackages? > >> > > >> > AFAIK there are cases where packages are not put into systemPackages, > >> > only to services.dbus.packages. (But that can't prevent the users or > >> > other options from independently adding the very same package to > >> > systemPackages.) > >> > >> I use that as much as possible. > >> There's really no need for a lot of packages to be in systemPackages or > >> in some user profile if they only provide a service and don't have lots > >> of often-used CLI tools. Same goes for udevPackages. > >> > >> However, wouldn't it be possible to uniq/nub these lists on evaluation? > >> It's perfectly functional/declarative, but I don't know if derivations > >> are comparable (for equality). > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > Vlada > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > nix-dev mailing list > >> > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > >> > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > >> _______________________________________________ > >> nix-dev mailing list > >> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > >> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > >> >
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev