Subject: [bug#31331] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add bitlbee-discord.

From: Nils Gillmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 20:30:51 +0000

parouby transcribed 1.5K bytes:
> Hi Nils,
> 
> On 02/05/2018 20:41, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> >> +               (string-append
> >> +                "https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/"
> >> +                "archive/" version ".tar.gz"))
> > 
> > Nitpick, I would write it like:>  +              (uri
> >  +               (string-append "https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/"
> >  +                              "archive/" version ".tar.gz"))
> 
> Yes, it's true, my bad !
> 
> >> +         (add-before 'configure 'bash-path
> >> +           (lambda* (#:key inputs outputs #:allow-other-keys)
> >> +             (substitute* "configure"
> >> +               (("\\$SHELL") (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "bash")
> >> +                                            "/bin/sh")))))
> > 
> > Is the configure.ac in this case special, or why doesn't it pick our SHELL
> > that is already in the environment of the build chroot?
> 
> In this case, without modification the configure try to run '/bin/bash'
> and don't care about 'SHELL' environment variable.
> I don't found any other way. Any idea ?

You could grep the guix source, folder gnu/packages, for cases where
SHELL is set. Examples that come to my mind right now are in autotools.scm
as well as gnuzilla.scm if I remember correctly.

I would try setting the shell via environment variables or make/configure flags
before  patching in a file that I generated before.
As a fallback that would be okay too, I think I did something similar to what
you did in my Newmoon/Palemoon package.

> >> +    (native-inputs `(("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)
> >> +                     ("autoconf" ,autoconf)
> >> +                     ("automake" ,automake)
> >> +                     ("texinfo" ,texinfo)
> >> +                     ("libtool" ,libtool)
> >> +                     ("bitlbee" ,bitlbee)
> > 
> > Does the buildsystem of bitlbee-discord check for bitlbee, or why is this required?
> 
> Yes it's need bitlbee lib and header for compilation (just like
> bitlbee-dev debian package).

I see. Okay.

> Thanks,
> --
> Pierre-Antoine