[bug#43477] [PATCH 0/1] guix: graph: Add 'plain' backend.

[zimoun]

On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 11:32, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> skribis:

> > For example, I would to know if all the packages in my profile are OK
> > about CVE and already archived on SWH, with the proposed patch, it is
> > simply:
> >
> >    guix package -I | cut -f1 \
> >      | xargs -I{} ./pre-inst-env guix graph -b list-nodes {} \
> >      | xargs -I{} guix lint -c cve,archival {}
> >
> > and obviously instead "-t bag" could be used.
> >
> > Well, another option as "--list-nodes" could be added.  WDTY?
>
> I think we should really focus on individual use cases and see how to
> best address them.  For example there’s

I am not sure to understand.  The aim of pipe composition is to build
bigger use cases reusing smaller units, right? (friday's trolling
inside ;-))

My individual use case is to list all the nodes of one package.  And
by "all the nodes" I mean for all the kinds of graph types.

There is a "guix graph --path" which is really nice.  Why not "guix
graph --list-nodes"?



> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/31442> that we could revisit now that we
> have provenance metadata and inferiors.  There’s also ‘guix size’, ‘guix
> refresh -l’, and ‘guix graph --path’.

The example above comes from this patch "guix health" that I commented
on [1]. :-)
Let's discuss that overthere.

[1] <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/31442#9>


> Perhaps we could have the backend you propose with the name ‘plain-flat’
> (or similar), but I agree with Ricardo that it seems misplaced given
> that it doesn’t show edges.

I understand.  The addition of a backend is not appropriate and
confusing (except the plain you backend you proposed).
Therefore, my proposal is to add another option to "guix graph":

  guix graph --list-nodes

similarly to "--path".  Except that "guix graph --list-nodes -t bag"
will show all the nodes of the bag graph.


WDYT?

All the best,
simon