Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-09 Thread Thompson, David
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > "Thompson, David" skribis: > >> From 4be0c2bfd2e2e9a03d860cfb2ff92aa66cbfaa70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: David Thompson >> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 21:23:09 -0400 >> Subject: [PATCH] scripts: environment: Use system* instead of system.

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Thompson, David" skribis: > From 4be0c2bfd2e2e9a03d860cfb2ff92aa66cbfaa70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: David Thompson > Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 21:23:09 -0400 > Subject: [PATCH] scripts: environment: Use system* instead of system. > > This allows for direct program invokation without needing

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Thompson, David
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > "Thompson, David" skribis: > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >>> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? >> >> This introduces implementation issues

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
"Thompson, David" writes: > guix environment --ad-hoc guile -- sh -c "cd bar/; guile -c '(frob)'" AFAIUI that's equivalent to guix environment --ad-hoc guile -E "cd bar/; guile -c '(frob)'" (Or was the intent to deprecate -E?) Therefore I'd agree that doing no string join in the '--' case i

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Thompson, David
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > "Thompson, David" skribis: > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >>> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? >> >> This introduces implementation issues

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
"Thompson, David" writes: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer > wrote: >> "Thompson, David" writes: >> >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should do an implicit ‘s

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Thompson, David" skribis: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? > > This introduces implementation issues. What if a user provides both a > -E command *and* a command aft

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Thompson, David
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer wrote: > "Thompson, David" writes: > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >>> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? >> >> This introduces implement

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
"Thompson, David" writes: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? > > This introduces implementation issues. What if a user provides both a > -E command *and* a command afte

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Thompson, David
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should > do an implicit ‘sh -c’? This introduces implementation issues. What if a user provides both a -E command *and* a command after '--'? What's the sane thing to do?

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
"Thompson, David" skribis: > I disagree, and here's why. Going back to the sudo/ssh example, it's > not possible to do 'cd /bar; frob' naively because this... > > sudo cd /bar; frob > > ...is two commands. And this doesn't work either because it's not a > valid string for exec: > > sudo

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Thompson, David
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi! > > David Thompson skribis: > >> In an effort to finish up a patch to add a --container flag to 'guix >> environment', I've encountered a serious problem. The --exec flag >> allows the user to pass an arbitrary command to be run using

Re: Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! David Thompson skribis: > In an effort to finish up a patch to add a --container flag to 'guix > environment', I've encountered a serious problem. The --exec flag > allows the user to pass an arbitrary command to be run using 'system'. > Unlike 'system*', 'system' spawns a command interpret

Using 'system*' instead of 'system' in 'guix environment'

2015-10-07 Thread David Thompson
Hello Guix hackers, In an effort to finish up a patch to add a --container flag to 'guix environment', I've encountered a serious problem. The --exec flag allows the user to pass an arbitrary command to be run using 'system'. Unlike 'system*', 'system' spawns a command interpreter first and passe