GNU bug report logs - #24737
`guix lint` should not check patch-file-names on inherited sources

Previous Next

Full log

Message #17 received at 24737 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
Cc: 24737 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24737: `guix lint` should not check patch-file-names on
 inherited sources
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 22:03:52 +0200

Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> skribis:

> Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> writes:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> skribis:
>>>
>>>> After patching 'notmuch', `guix lint -c patch-file-names` does not pass
>>>> for 'python-notmuch' which inherits the source from 'notmuch'.
>>>
>>> I agree but that’s not quite possible: the “inheritance” relation (which
>>> is really just a copy of a record) is not known at run time.
>>>
>>> So we’d need another trick to guess whether a patch is coming from
>>> elsewhere and should consequently be ignored by ‘lint’.
>>
>> Here is a "RFC" patch that thwarts the warning if the source file name
>> is different from the package name. Not sure how to properly make it
>> part of the procedure, so that the checks are actually skipped as well.
>
> I just realized this approach will skip this check completely, if there
> are no packages that are named the same as origin (e.g. in the case of
> the soon-to-be-added avro, where the source is shared between the
> various avro-{c,python,java} etc packages.)
>
> The best approach is probably to check patch-file-names against
> (origin-actual-file-name (package-source package)), assuming one can
> extract the "base" name of origin-actual-file-name reliably.

(‘origin-actual-file-name’ already returns a basename.)

Could you check whether the patch your proposed works well for some of
the annoying cases we currently have, and also adds those as test cases
in ‘tests/lint.scm’?  (See the manual on how to run the tests (info
"(guix) Running the Test Suite").)

If that works well enough, we should go for it.

The only 100% reliable way to address this, I think, would be to build a
patch to package mapping, and then make sure that for each patch, at
least one of the corresponding packages has a matching name.  The
problem is that ‘lint’ is currently designed to work one package at a
time.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.