GNU bug report logs - #72925
Adding JPM package for Janet

Previous Next

Full log

Message #67 received at 72925 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247 <at> gmail.com>
To: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247 <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>, 72925 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Munyoki Kilyungi <me <at> bonfacemunyoki.com>,
 Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e+guix <at> gmail.com>,
 Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>, jgart <jgart <at> dismail.de>,
 Omar Bassam <omar.bassam88 <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bug#72925] [PATCH v3] adding jpm package
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2024 21:40:09 -0400

Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247 <at> gmail.com> writes:

>> I don't think this should be related to this patch.
>
> As I mentioned previously, I believe your packaging of "jpm" is
> correctly done.

After having taken a look at the source of JPM, I believe I was
previously mistaken.  I don't believe the JPM packaging is correct.  And
I do believe that the issue I was observing is related to the patch.

Specifically, in the file "configs/linux_config.janet", among other
things, the below are set

#+begin_src janet
   :c++ "c++"
   :c++-link "c++"
   :cc "cc"
   :cc-link "cc"
#+end_src

Since Guix, as far as I know, doesn't have packages that provide c++ nor
cc, I believe the above need to be patched to refer to gcc and g++
respectively.

Further, I believe JPM should have a few propagated inputs:
- gcc-toolchain
- curl
- git
- nss-certs.

Please address the above two in v8 if you agree.  If not, please help me
understand where I may have erred in the analysis above.

-- 
Suhail

Previous Next

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