GNU bug report logs -
#71697
[PATCH] guix: lint: Honor 'no-archival?' package property.
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Hi,
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 11:19, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> That said, I find ‘--dry-run’
> in this case not so useful because it would just print the same thing on
> and on for each and every package.
No, it’s different; or can be. For instance, ’archival’ is listed for
one but not for the other.
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ git diff
diff --git a/gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm b/gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm
index 3680cab044..5a22f7a865 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm
@@ -1775,6 +1775,7 @@ (define-public python-scikit-learn
python-pytest-xdist))
(propagated-inputs
(list python-numpy python-threadpoolctl python-scipy python-joblib))
+ (properties '((lint-excluded-checkers . (archival name synopsis))))
(home-page "https://scikit-learn.org/")
(synopsis "Machine Learning in Python")
(description
$ ./pre-inst-env guix lint hello python-scikit-learn --dry-run
hello <at> 2.12.1 checked by archival compiler-for-target cve derivation description formatting github-url gnu-description haskell-stackage home-page input-labels inputs-should-be-native inputs-should-not-be-input license mirror-url name optional-tests patch-file-names patch-headers profile-collisions refresh source source-file-name source-unstable-tarball synopsis tests-true wrapper-inputs.
python-scikit-learn <at> 1.4.2 checked by compiler-for-target cve derivation description formatting github-url gnu-description haskell-stackage home-page input-labels inputs-should-be-native inputs-should-not-be-input license mirror-url optional-tests patch-file-names patch-headers profile-collisions refresh source source-file-name source-unstable-tarball tests-true wrapper-inputs.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Well, the aim is to know which checker applies to which package just
before they are indeed applied.
Initially, I thought something like:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
modified guix/scripts/lint.scm
@@ -223,6 +223,11 @@ (define-command (guix-lint . args)
(when (assoc-ref opts 'list?)
(list-checkers-and-exit checkers))
+ (when (assoc-ref opts 'dry-run?)
+ (if (null? args)
+ (show-checkers-and-exit)
+ (show-packages-checkers-and-exit args checkers)))
+
(with-error-handling
(let ((any-lint-checker-requires-store?
(any lint-checker-requires-store? checkers)))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
where ’show-checkers-and-exit’ takes into account only option ’-c’ or
option ’-x’, displaying something as: “The following checkers would run
for all <number of packages> packages:” and the list of checkers.
And ’show-packages-checkers-and-exit’ would display:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
The following checkers would run for packages: <"short“ "list of package <at> X.Y>
+ list of all common checkers
The following checkers would be excluded for packages: <"short“ "list of package <at> X.Y>
+ list of excluded checkers
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
But then I concluded that would not be a true dry-run. ;-)
For the comments, thanks! That’s better.
Cheers,
simon
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 44 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.