GNU bug report logs - #71371
[PATCH] gnu: svn-fetch: Make revision field optional.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 05:53:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: 71371 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Josselin Poiret <dev <at> jpoiret.xyz>, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>, Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, Florian Pelz <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>, Christopher Baines <guix <at> cbaines.net>, Matthew Trzcinski <matt <at> excalamus.com>
Subject: [bug#71371] [PATCH] gnu: svn-fetch: Make revision field optional.
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 18:32:57 +0200

Hi Nicolas,

On Wed, 05 Jun 2024 at 07:52, Nicolas Goaziou via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> * guix/svn-download.scm (<svn-reference>): Set default value for REVISION
> field to #F.
> (svn-fetch):
> (svn-multi-fetch): Take into consideration the revision can be a number or #F.
> * guix/build/svn.scm (svn-fetch): Skip "-r" argument when revision is #F.
> * doc/guix.texi (origin Reference): Document changes about REVISION field.

Does it make sense to have a Subversion reference without any specific
revision?

> -                                (string->number (getenv "svn revision"))
> +                                (match (getenv "svn revision")
> +                                  ("#f" #f)
> +                                  (s (string->number s)))

[...]

> -                                   (string->number (getenv "svn revision"))
> +                                   (match (getenv "svn revision")
> +                                     ("#f" #f)
> +                                     (s (string-to-number s)))

I am probably missing something, why ’string-to-number’ and not
’string->number’?


Cheers,
simon
This bug report was last modified 330 days ago.

Previous Next

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