GNU bug report logs - #43193
[PATCH] guix: Add --with-dependency-source option

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 43193 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357 <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43193 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#43193] [PATCH] guix: Add --with-dependency-source option
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 23:16:28 -0600

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

On 9/10/20 3:43 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357 <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>>      The attached patch adds support for the --with-dependency-source
>> common build option. It can be used to specify the sources of
>> dependencies of specified packages. With this step, we can close
>> #42155. This is also a step in closing #43061.
> Excellent!
>
>> Note that I suggested making a new
>> --with-dependency-source=package=source build option in response to
>> #42155 and nobody responded with an objection. So I am sending this
>> patch with the assumption that there are no objections to this new
>> build option, and that if a member of the community wants to
>> completely replace the behavior of --with-source with the behavior of
>> the new option, that person can do the work required to not break
>> --with-source=source.
> OK.  Like I wrote at <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/42155#3>, I wouldn’t
> mind simply calling this new option ‘--with-source’.  What we’d lose by
> doing so is the warning you get if you do
> ‘--with-source=does-not-exist=whatever’, saying the option had no
> effect, but that’s about it.  The new ‘--with-source’ behavior
> (recursive) would be consistent with the other options, which, to me, is
> more important.
I agree that '--with-source' is a better name for the option, but I 
don't want to lose that particular functionality. I worked a little more 
to alter "--with-source" while still preserving the simple 
'--with-source=source' option, because once it's committed to master, it 
will be difficult to turn back and get the ideal implementation. The 
result is a bit dirty and should be refactored and cleaned, but at least 
it works. Attached is the updated patch.
>
> WDYT?
>
>> >From 91a89277067fd454ad77edb3a09ed06382f3694c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357+guix <at> gmail.com>
>> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 17:45:08 -0600
>> Subject: [PATCH v1 1/1] guix: Add --with-dependency-source option
>>
>> * guix/scripts/build.scm: (transform-package-inputs/source): new
>>    function
>> (evaluate-source-replacement-specs): new function
>> (%transformations): add with-dependency-source option
>> (%transformation-options): add with-dependency-source-option
>> (show-transformation-options-help): document --with-dependency-source
> [...]
>
>> +(define (evaluate-source-replacement-specs specs proc)
>> +  "Parse SPECS, a list of strings like \"guile=/path/to/source\", and return a
>> +list of package pairs, where (PROC PACKAGE URL) returns the replacement package.
>> +Raise an error if an element of SPECS uses invalid syntax, or if a package it
>> +refers to could not be found."
>> +  (map (lambda (spec)
>> +         (match (string-tokenize spec %not-equal)
>> +           ((spec url)
>> +            (define (replace old)
>> +              (proc old url))
>> +            (cons spec replace))
>> +           (x
>> +            (leave (G_ "invalid replacement specification: ~s~%") spec))))
>                                    ^
> Add “source” here.  It’s always a good idea to not have the exact same
> error message in several places.  :-)
Fixed.
> Could you:
>
>    1. adjust doc/guix.texi accordingly?  That is, if we rename this new
>       option to ‘--with-source’, simply add a note stating that it’s
>       recursive.
I included this in the attached patch.
>    2. add a test to tests/guix-build.sh?  There are already --with-source
>       tests in other files.  You can mimic them, essentially to make sure
>       the option has an effect.
>    3. optionally add an entry as a separate commit to
>       etc/news.scm.  I can do that for you if you want.
>
Do you still think the tests should be updated and this change should be 
announced in the news file? I'm willing to do these.
> Thanks!
>
> Ludo’.
-Jesse

[0001-guix-Make-with-source-option-recursive.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Previous Next

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