GNU bug report logs - #43976
[PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#43976: closed ([PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs)
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 16:06:02 +0000

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

Your message dated Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:04:58 +0100
with message-id <877dpyeuz9.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: [bug#43976] [PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #43976,
regarding [PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs
to be marked as done.

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


-- 
43976: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=43976
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

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

From: raingloom <raingloom <at> riseup.net>
To: Guix Patches <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:52:20 +0200

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

Here it is, chicken-build-system.

# What works
Building eggs, dependencies, importing them from search path.

# What's broken
Cross-compilation has not been attempted beacuse the Go build system I
based this on does not support it either.

# Necessary improvements
The Go build system removes some references. I was not sure if this is
needed for Chicken, so for now I left it out.

# Eggs
Some were selected because I'll need for the 9p egg, the rest because
the agrep egg was the first one I found that had dependencies, so it
was selected as a perfect test case.
I don't know if all eggs will work. Eggs that bind to native libraries
(like SDL) still need to be tested.

## SRFI-14 licensing
SRFI-14 has a weird license. The metadata says it's "BSD" but it's
clearly not BSD. I'm not sure what it is or if it's compatible with
Guix. If not, we could probably contact the authors and ask them to
relicense it.

# Chicken 4
Not attempted. Nix supports it but it's old and looks mostly abandoned.
I think we can skip it.

[0001-gnu-Added-search-paths-for-Chicken-Scheme.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0002-guix-Added-chicken-build-system.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0003-gnu-Use-qualified-license-names-in-chicken.scm-inste.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0004-gnu-Added-imports-for-chicken-eggs.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0005-gnu-Added-chicken-srfi-1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0006-gnu-Added-chicken-srfi-69.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0007-gnu-Added-chicken-iset.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0008-gnu-Added-chicken-datatype.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0009-gnu-Added-chicken-srfi-14.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0010-gnu-Added-chicken-agrep.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[0011-gnu-Added-myself-to-chicken.scm-copyright.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[Message part 15 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: raingloom <raingloom <at> riseup.net>
Cc: 43976-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#43976] [PATCH] Chicken build system + some example eggs
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:04:58 +0100

Hi raingloom,

I’ve now pushed the 11 patches as of
b5a6eddd8e9f2e840f47d3307f436433e74e16f3, tweaking packages in minor
ways: tweaking descriptions (info "(guix) Synopses and Descriptions"),
adding a ‘file-name’ field in origin that contains the full package name
and version, changing ‘native-inputs’ to ‘inputs’ in a couple of cases,
removing the stale search path comment as discussed earlier, adjusting
commit logs.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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