Hi Suhail, I just have some questions before submitting v8 if you don't mind. just to make sure I understand correctly. On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 at 04:40, Suhail Singh wrote: > Suhail Singh writes: > > >> I don't think this should be related to this patch. > > > > As I mentioned previously, I believe your packaging of "jpm" is > > correctly done. > > After having taken a look at the source of JPM, I believe I was > previously mistaken. I don't believe the JPM packaging is correct. And > I do believe that the issue I was observing is related to the patch. > > Specifically, in the file "configs/linux_config.janet", among other > things, the below are set > > #+begin_src janet > :c++ "c++" > :c++-link "c++" > :cc "cc" > :cc-link "cc" > #+end_src > > Since Guix, as far as I know, doesn't have packages that provide c++ nor > cc, I believe the above need to be patched to refer to gcc and g++ > respectively. > > So we need to substitute the above "c++" and "cc" in the "configs/linux_config.janet" to point to the absolute path for the gcc and g++ packages? Should we also replace other commands that are hard-coded like "cp" and "chown" from coreutils the same way I did in my first initial patch? Further, I believe JPM should have a few propagated inputs: > - gcc-toolchain > - curl > - git > - nss-certs. > > I understand why we need gcc-toolchain. But why do we need curl, git and nss-certs? Please address the above two in v8 if you agree. If not, please help me > understand where I may have erred in the analysis above. > > -- > Suhail > Thanks, Omar