GNU bug report logs - #48314
[PATCH] Install guix system on Raspberry Pi

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: Stefan <stefan-guix <at> vodafonemail.de>
Cc: 48314 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#48314] Patches to install guix system on Raspberry Pi
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 21:04:17 +0200

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

Hi Stefan,

In 04-gnu-bootloader-add-u-boot.patch, I think that having #:name is too magical
(it still only replaces part of the package name, and then still only after
substitution).  But if made non-magical, then it has too little benefit.

Likewise for #:description.

If it's alright with you, can we just drop #:name xxx and #:description xxx
altogether and instead do:

(define-public u-boot-rpi-3-efi
  (package
    (inherit
     (make-preinstalled-u-boot-package
      "rpi_3_32b"
      "arm-linux-gnueabihf"
      #:name "rpi-3-efi"
      #:configs %u-boot-rpi-efi-configs
      #:description %u-boot-rpi-efi-description-32-bit))
    (name "u-boot-rpi-3-efi")
    (description %u-boot-rpi-efi-description-32-bit)))

And similar for all the other u-boot definitions, and for
the usage of make-u-boot-package inside make-preinstalled-u-boot-package ?

Or are there upsides to doing it like you did it?

I'm aware that the same can be said for "board" ... which is used already.
However, that parameter is also used for something else, so it needs to be there.

NAME isn't used for anything else but for doing what a regular package inherit
could do anyway.  Is there a downside when using package inherit?

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

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