From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 16 06:09:37 2018 Received: (at 25296) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2018 11:09:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58108 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ebP7X-0000fo-DO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:09:35 -0500 Received: from dd26836.kasserver.com ([85.13.145.193]:46614) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ebP7V-0000fg-Pd for 25296@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:09:34 -0500 Received: from localhost (178.113.219.86.wireless.dyn.drei.com [178.113.219.86]) by dd26836.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E08993360169; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:09:31 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:09:29 +0100 From: Danny Milosavljevic To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#25296: fully functional desktop installation Message-ID: <20180116120929.28686761@scratchpost.org> In-Reply-To: <87vag2857m.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20161229171045.263747a9@riseup.net> <87bmvpb21m.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7xgwom7.fsf@gnu.org> <87shb8jedn.fsf@gnu.org> <87lggzdzh9.fsf@gnu.org> <87vag2857m.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25296 Cc: 25296@debbugs.gnu.org, Mathieu Lirzin X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Hi, > Hmm, OK. Do you think it=E2=80=99s too much to ask, given the current au= dience > (tinkerers), to add those packages to their config, or to install them > with =E2=80=9Cguix package -i=E2=80=9D? I think one of the nice features of Guix is that the user can install packa= ges on their own. Other distributions leave the decision of which packages= to install up to the administrator (a separate person in companies). I wo= rk in a very large company where often some simple stuff is missing on serv= ers and admins will not install it for fear of fucking up some unrelated al= ready-installed package (understandable since all the dependencies are dyna= mic in Solaris and applications will just pick up whatever is lying around = in the global namespace). Long story short, I think it's a good thing that the user has his own profi= le which isn't magically updated and doesn't magically pick up things not i= n the user profile - except when it's already in the store bitwise-identica= l. That way, if he needs some application for work it will not randomly br= eak and he can be sure that it will do what it did yesterday. If he wants = to update, he updates. Otherwise not. His choice. So long story short, I myself prefer having no applications in the system p= rofile and the user installing all (business-relevant) applications themsel= ves. It gives control to the user. (my "packages" field is: (packages (cons* nss-certs ;for HTTPS access font-adobe100dpi font-adobe75dpi font-bitstream-vera fon= t-dejavu font-gnu-freefont-ttf font-gnu-unifont font-liberation font-ubuntu adwaita-icon-theme %base-packages)) ; xterm is there by default. And the ones that are still in there bother me :) ) As for libreoffice and other large packages, maybe I'm old-fashioned, but h= uge packages waste disk space and provide an attack surface for exploits - = and maybe no regular user uses it. That said, I've installed it :P I'd vote for adding libreoffice and icecat to desktop.tmpl and not to gnome= (since they are not part of the GNOME project). Users who like a minimal system can always use lightweight-desktop.tmpl or = even bare-bones.tmpl. And I think it's important to mention the approximate space requirements fo= r desktop.tmpl in the manual (for partitioning).