GNU bug report logs - #27791
[PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#27791: closed ([PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 13:51:01 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Fri, 10 Nov 2017 14:50:08 +0100
with message-id <87r2t69ran.fsf <at> fsfe.org>
and subject line Re: [bug#27791] [PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #27791,
regarding [PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
27791: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=27791
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 14:35:56 +0200

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello guix,

Attached is a patch to include passmenu, a dmenu interface to the pass
password store.

I was not quite sure how to structure this patch, as it basically installs
and wraps a shell script from the `password-store' sources. We could
instead include it as a separate output of our `password-store' package,
but I already had it like this in my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH and I was not even
sure if that approach was in general preferable.

- Jelle

[Message part 4 (text/html, inline)]

[0001-gnu-Add-passmenu.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

[Message part 6 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
To: 27791-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>, Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bug#27791] [PATCH] gnu: Add passmenu
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 14:50:08 +0100

In the end, I simply added dmenu to the list of `inputs' and replaced my
calls to `wrap-program' with a `substitute*' call. Pushed as 177475cfb5
to master.

Someone wanting to make use of an alternative to dmenu could just
inherit from `password-store' in order to override the relevant inputs
and/or phases. The closure size of password-store went from ~421MB to
~440MB, but as it is not a dependency of any non-password-store related
items, this should not be a big problem.

Thanks again for the guidance and reminders.

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

> Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org> writes:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Hi Jelle,
>>>
>>> Is anything holding this back?
>>>
>>>   https://bugs.gnu.org/27791
>>
>> It just fell through the cracks, thanks for reminding me :-).
>> I still needed to address some of Marius' concerns though...
>>
>>>
>>> TIA!  :-)
>>>
>>> Ludo’.
>>>
>>> Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> skribis:
>>>
>>>> Hi Jelle,
>>>>
>>>> Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello guix,
>>>>>
>>>>> Attached is a patch to include passmenu, a dmenu interface to the pass
>>>>> password store.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was not quite sure how to structure this patch, as it basically installs
>>>>> and wraps a shell script from the `password-store' sources. We could
>>>>> instead include it as a separate output of our `password-store' package,
>>>>> but I already had it like this in my GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH and I was not even
>>>>> sure if that approach was in general preferable.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think wrapping it with dmenu in PATH is necessary. Users of this
>>>> script are expected to have dmenu from before, and may want to use
>>>> another implementation (e.g. rofi), another version, etc.
>>
>> While I agree with your general thoughts, wasn't guix supposed to
>> prevent this ad-hoc mishmash of software? If someone wants to use
>> another implementation (e.g. rofi), they could just create their own
>> package that inherits from `password-store' and overrides the "dmenu"
>> input. Case in point, I am not currently a user of dmenu (besides
>> indirectly through the passmenu script).
>
> In the "rofi" case it would be overriding dmenu and providing some extra
> command-line arguments, but overall I agree with you and don't really
> have a strong opinion.  To my knowledge there is no established policy
> for when to allow "impurities" (aka unqualified paths), but optional
> dependencies often get a free pass.
>
> I'm happy either way, so do what you think is best :)

Previous Next

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