[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming
From: |
Maxim Cournoyer |
Subject: |
Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.) |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Sep 2021 22:32:38 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Xinglu Chen <public@yoctocell.xyz> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 23 2021, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Xinglu Chen <public@yoctocell.xyz> skribis:
>>
>>> Some services might be useful to have in both Guix System and Guix Home;
>>> for instance, Guix System currently has a service for configuring
>>> Syncthing, and I think it makes sense to also have one for Guix Home,
>>> this would mean that people not using Guix System (me :-)) could also
>>> have Guix manage Syncthing. With the current approach, we would have to
>>> copy and paste quite a bit of code, and if the Syncthing service for
>>> Guix System changes, then the one for Guix Home might have to change as
>>> well.
>>
>> Silly question, but why do we need to have two different configuration
>> record types in the first place?
>
> The problem is that the configuration records for system and home
> service don’t necessarily have the same fields. The Syncthing service
> for Guix System has a ‘user’ and a ‘group’ field, which is not really of
> any use in Guix Home, as the only user would be the user invoking ‘guix
> home’.
>
>> Sharing configuration between Home and System sounds important to me: it
>> means users can easily move services from one to the other, which is
>> pretty big deal. It also means we’d have much less code to maintain.
>
> Agreed, that’s what I would like to see as well.
>
>> Would that be feasible? (Apologies if this has already been
>> discussed!)
>
> Since it might not make sense to have the same records fields for a
> system service and home service, I proposed (in the mail you replied to)
> a ‘define-configuration’ form that would generate a configuration record
> for a system service and optionally one for a home service, without
> having to maintain two records separately.
>
> (define-configuration syncthing-configuration
> (package
> (package syncthing)
> "Syncthing package to use.")
> (arguments
> (list-of-strings ’())
> "Command line arguments to pass to the Syncthing package.")
> (log-flags
> (integer 0)
> "Sum of logging flags.")
> (user
> (maybe-string 'disabled)
> "The user as which the Syncthing service is to be run."
> (home-service? #f)) ; not for Guix Home
> (group
> (string "users")
> "The group as which the Syncthing service is to be run."
> (home-service? #f)) ; likewise ^^
> (home
> (maybe-string 'disabled)
> "Common configuration and data directory.")
> (home-service? #t))
>
> It would generate <syncthing-configuration> and
> <home-syncthing-configuration>. The only difference being that
> <home-syncthing-configuration> doesn’t have a ‘user’ and a ‘group’
> field.
Interesting idea, although I'm a bit wary of adding yet more complexity
to this already relatively complex macro. I'd favor the cleaner
inheritance idea proposed by Maxime Devos. I wonder if some fields can
even be masked or removed through inheritance or some other record
transformation (haven't checked).
> It’s probably going to be quite complicated, so it would be good to get
> some feedback/thoughts on it. Cc Maxim since he has done some work with
> (gnu services configuration).
>
> Also, it’s probably time to properly document (gnu services
> configuration) in the manual. ;-)
Agreed!
Maxim
- Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules., (continued)
- Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules., Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/28
- Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Xinglu Chen, 2021/09/24
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Maxime Devos, 2021/09/24
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Xinglu Chen, 2021/09/24
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Maxime Devos, 2021/09/24
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/28
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Andrew Tropin, 2021/09/28
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Joshua Branson, 2021/09/24
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/28
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.), Maxime Devos, 2021/09/29
- Re: Code sharing between system and home services (was Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules.),
Maxim Cournoyer <=
Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules., Ryan Prior, 2021/09/15
Re: On the naming of System and Home services modules., Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/23