GNU bug report logs - #68180
[PATCH 0/4] Add emacs-pde

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 68180 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e+guix <at> gmail.com>, Andrew Tropin <andrew <at> trop.in>
Subject: [bug#68180] [PATCH 1/4] gnu: emacs: Add awk, find, sed and sh to PATH wrapper.
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2023 16:10:03 -0500

Hi Liliana,

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Am Sonntag, dem 31.12.2023 um 11:59 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
>> Before this change, using Emacs in a pure environment, e.g. 'guix
>> shell --pure emacs', would cause problems such as:
>> 
>>   jka-compr-insert-file-contents: Uncompression program ‘sh’ not
>> found
>> 
>> And other problems were found requiring the other tools.  While the
>> above could be patched in place for 'sh', it seems more robust and
>> universally useful to have the commands appear on PATH, should other
>> Elisp modules want to call to these directly as well.
>> 
>> * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs-minimal) [arguments] <phases>: Adjust
>> the
>> wrap-emacs-paths phase to wrap additional inputs.
>> [inputs]: Add findutils, gawk and sed.
>> (%emacs-modules): Add (srfi srfi-26).
>> 
>> Change-Id: Ifb4fe2fc12ddc9eae387adb3da3f7821fab78e65
>> ---
> We already have a phase to patch in the real path of /bin/sh where it's
> used.  This appears to be an odd case that's missed.

I appreciate exactness, but it seems fragile to rely on nobody adding
new references or someone catching them as new Emacs modules get added
or changed :-).

My reasoning was that since Emacs already depends on bash, why not
ensure it'll always be found on PATH, by wrapping instead of
substituting.

Does it make sense?

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

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