Le 20 janvier 2021 15:34:11 GMT-05:00, raingloom a écrit : >On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 22:24:16 -0500 >Julien Lepiller wrote: > >> Actually, here's how I use it: >> >https://framagit.org/tyreunom/system-configuration/-/blob/master/systems/tachikoma.scm#L69 >> >> And the key file is the one generated by guix, unmodified: >> >https://framagit.org/tyreunom/system-configuration/-/blob/master/keys/xana.pub >> >> Le 16 janvier 2021 19:34:49 GMT-05:00, raingloom >> a écrit : >> >On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 07:10:47 +0100 >> >Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >> > >> >> raingloom writes: >> >> >> >> > guix archive --authorize started issuing a warning some time ago >> >> > pointing to "authorized-keys" in "operating-system". >> >> > >> >> > * that is not a valid field of operating-system >> >> >> >> That’s right. It’s a field of guix-configuration, which is >> >documented >> >> in 10.8.1 Base Services. >> >> >> > >> >Thanks, I found that out already, that's how I ran into the other >> >issues. >> >I'm still confused about what the proper way to store the config >info >> >is. Like how I should even store it as Scheme source code. > >Thanks, guess I'll go down the file route for now, but this is an >unsatisfactory solution IMHO. >What if you have multiple keys, or want to only include a subset of >keys in a given machine? >Having to use a file object to store a sexp is an odd choice when every >other part of Guix tries as hard as it can to use sexps and Scheme data >structures for configuration. > >If no one wants to fix it, mind if I give it a go? Go ahead :)