On 2024-04-24 12:59:55 +0100, Fabio Natali wrote: > On 2024-04-19, 13:25 +0100, Fabio Natali wrote: > > On 2024-04-18, 23:09 +0200, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> wrote: > >> first, let me thank you for the review, and apologize for somewhat > >> late response, sadly I have been busy. > > Hi Tomas, > > Sorry for the slow follow-up. After some further testing and some input > from other Guix friends, this is my humble feedback on what I'd put in a > v2 patch. > > - Use Guix's 'invoke' instead of a custom 'checked-system*' procedure. > > - Where possible, use '#$(file-append foobar "/bin/foo")' instead of > '(string-append #$foobar "/bin/foo")', so that as much computation as > possible happens at build time as opposed to run time. It's a > microscopic difference, but still worth the change I think. > > What do you think? Not urgent, but do you think this is something you > might be interested to include in a v2? No problem if you're busy, but > let me know if there's anything I can help with. All sounds reasonable, will send v2, cannot guarantee when, hopefully this week. > > Tangentally, with regard to 'capture-stdout', I'm exploring if this is > something that could be added to '(guix build utils)'⁰ or perhaps > addressed in Guile¹ instead of Guix. This can be left as it is in the > patch, and potentially refactored away once a similar procedure is > available from Guix or Guile. > > Thanks, best wishes, Fabio. Yes, I noticed the thread. Having the option of doing basically (with-output-to-string (λ _ (invoke "date"))) would be amazing. I hope someone will take it up and implement. :) Have a nice day, Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.