Chris Marusich <cmmarus...@gmail.com> writes: > Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wur...@mdc-berlin.de> writes: > >> 1.) the environment includes glibc and its executables. Is this ever >> desired? When loading an environment from a file or from a package >> (i.e. when “--ad-hoc” is NOT provided) “guix environment” uses >> “package-environment-inputs”, which runs “package->bag” and then >> “bag-transitive-inputs”. The resulting list of packages is then >> used as the inputs for a profile derivation. That seems a bit >> excessive. >> >> Would it not be sufficient to use only the direct inputs of the >> package as the inputs to the profile derivation? That way “guix >> environment foo” would behave just like “guix environment --ad-hoc >> input-a-of-foo input-b-of-foo input-c-of-foo”. >> >> Is there a reason why it creates a whole bag and dumps its contents >> into the inputs of the profile derivation? > > My interpretation of the intended behavior of "guix environment foo" is > that is that only the inputs of (the bag of) foo should show up in the > environment, not the transitive closure of inputs. I am surprised to > hear that that is not the case, but perhaps I am missing something.
Yeah, this was also quite a surprise to me. David, would it be wrong for us to change the behaviour such that only direct inputs end up in the environment? Aside from this issue, I find it worrying that the graft for glibc does not end up in the environment. This is a serious problem for those who use “guix environment” on RHEL 6. Ludo, do you know if this is a more general bug or if it is due to the design of “guix environment”? -- Ricardo