Re: sbcl-slime-swank won't load

[Trev]

On August 19, 2022 7:49:55 a.m. PDT, Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@posteo.net> 
wrote:
>Trev <trev@trevdev.ca> skribis:
>
>> Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@posteo.net> writes:
>>
>>> Is sbcl installed in your user profile or not?
>>
>> Not directly. It might be there as a dependency. Everything other than
>> stumpwm itself is installed in my guix home profile.
>>
>> In order for any of my stumpwm-contrib modules to work, I had to write a
>> gexp and an home-xdg-configuration-files service to link them to
>> ~/.config/common-lisp.
>>
>> Currently this is how sbcl-slime-swank is put into
>> source-registry.conf.d in my user profile.
>>
>> Here's the relevant code: https://paste.debian.net/1251005/
>
>For the Common Lisp libraries to be found, the XDG_CONFIG_DIRS and
>XDG_DATA_DIRS environment variables must contain the paths to the
>profile where the libraries are installed.
>
>Something like:
>--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
>XDG_CONFIG_DIRS="/home/username/.guix-profile/etc:..."
>XDG_DATA_DIRS="/home/username/.guix-profile/share:..."
>--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
>These variables are set automatically when sbcl is installed in the
>profile (they can be set by some other programs too).
>

Would the path of least resistance be to install sbcl explicitly in my home 
profile?

Maybe the way to go is to surrender and eithet put all of my sbcl in the 
system, or home profile, not both. I am hesitating over installing 3rd party 
systems on my root profile.

Having gnome/gdm for display management and as a fallback is a nice luxury to 
have. I guess I need to weigh some priorities here.

>If you don't want sbcl in the profile, one or both variables might not
>contain the paths to the profile, and your guix-home config has to put
>them in. I've never used guix-home yet, but I suppose
>home-environment-variables-service-type can do that, and then creating
>a custom ".config/common-lisp" directory should not be necessary.

This would be simpler than a gexp for consolidating package source registries.