GNU bug report logs - #32140
[PATCH] gnu: make-u-boot-package: Don't install "sunxi-spl-with-ecc.bin".

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>

Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 13:59:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 32140 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#32140] [PATCH] gnu: make-u-boot-package: Don't install "sunxi-spl-with-ecc.bin".
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:16:21 +0200
Hi Danny,

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:

> * gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm (make-u-boot-package)[arguments]<#:phases>
> [install]: Don't install "sunxi-spl-with-ecc.bin".
> ---
>  gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm | 14 +++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm b/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
> index 7599f4ac2..19d47e6e5 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
> @@ -508,7 +508,19 @@ board-independent tools.")))
>                 (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out"))
>                        (libexec (string-append out "/libexec"))
>                        (uboot-files (append
> -                                    (find-files "." ".*\\.(bin|efi|img|spl|itb|dtb|rksd)$")
> +                                    (filter
> +                                     ;; Those would not be reproducible
> +                                     ;; because of the randomness used
> +                                     ;; to produce them.
> +                                     ;; It's expected that the user will
> +                                     ;; use u-boot-tools to generate them
> +                                     ;; instead.
> +                                     (lambda (name)
> +                                       (not
> +                                        (string-suffix?

Nitpick: you could write:  (remove (lambda (string-suffix? …)) lst)
instead.

Otherwise LGTM, thanks!

Ludo’.




This bug report was last modified 6 years and 305 days ago.

Previous Next


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