David Thompson <dthomps...@worcester.edu> skribis: > Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > >> David Thompson <dthomps...@worcester.edu> skribis: >> >>> Just today I used 'guix environment guix' to quickly create a >>> development environment for Guix hacking. I figured it should be >>> mentioned in the HACKING file to assist developers that happen to >>> already by using a Guix system. >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> Sure, please commit! I thought I had done it, but no. >> >>> +If you are building Guix on a system that already runs Guix, you can use >>> 'guix >>> +environment' to spawn a shell whose environment contains all of the >>> necessary >>> +packages without installing them to your user profile: >>> + >>> + guix environment guix >> >> This is true only when ‘guix’ refers to the development version, which >> has the autotools etc. as inputs. > > Okay, so that's not always the case? In that case, we could say: > > guix environment -e '(@@ (gnu packages package-management) guix-devel)'
You’re right that it will always work in practice, because there’ll always be a ‘guix-devel’ more recent than ‘guix’. So the wording above is OK. The problem I was raising does not really apply here; I’m shamelessly sidetracking, I admit. ;-) >> I think it would be nice to have a ‘--install’ option to specify >> additional packages to add to the environment, so that one could do >> (say): >> >> guix environment mpc -i autoconf automake libtool >> >> and get a really complete development environment. >> >> (We discussed this on IRC some time ago, but I think we had overlooked >> this simple solution.) > > I think that is a good idea in general, so I will work on adding it. OK. Ludo’.
