guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#38865] [PATCH] add package definition for liquid-dsp-1.3.2


From: Brett Gilio
Subject: [bug#38865] [PATCH] add package definition for liquid-dsp-1.3.2
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:57:29 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)

Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Christopher Howard <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> Patch is attached for a new package definition. It passed all guix lint
>> checks, except that I received an error from guix lint that it could
>> not find the CVE json URL. Package builds and passes all tests on x86-
>> 64.
>
> Oh, the CVE error is weird; could you paste it?
>
>> From 3c8ccf400dbbf23191b958dfdcef986d1927719c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Christopher Howard <address@hidden>
>> Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2020 19:58:25 -0900
>> Subject: [PATCH] Adds new package liquid-dsp
>>
>> ---
>>  gnu/packages/liquid-dsp.scm | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Could you provide a commit log?  (See
> <https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Submitting-Patches.html>.)
>
> Overall the patch LGTM; minor comments:
>
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/liquid-dsp.scm
>
> Packages are usually grouped together in a file that reflect the
> category they belong to.  Would it make sense to call this file
> ‘sdr.scm’, and it would eventually include other packages related to
> software-defined ratio, or perhaps dsp.scm?
>
>> +(define-public liquid-dsp
>> +  (package
>> +    (name "liquid-dsp")
>> +    (version "1.3.2")
>> +    (source
>> +     (origin (method git-fetch)
>> +             (uri (git-reference
>> +                   (url (string-append 
>> "https://github.com/jgaeddert/liquid-dsp.git";))
>
> No need for ‘string-append’ here.  :-)
>
>> +    (synopsis "Signal processing library for software-defined radios 
>> written in C")
>
> I’d dropped “written in C” from the synopsis.
>
>> +    (description
>> +     "Liquid DSP provides a set of extensible DSP modules that do not
>                                                  ^
> Please write: “@dfn{digital signal processing} (DSP) modules”, for clarity.
>
>> +rely on external dependencies or cumbersome frameworks")
>
> Please add a period at the end.  Bonus point if you can expound a bit.
>
> Could you send an updated patch?
>
> Thank you!
>
> Ludo’.
>
>
>
>

There is also a liquid-dsp patch in #38842 by Evan Straw (cc).

-- 
Brett M. Gilio
GNU Guix, Contributor | GNU Project, Webmaster
[DFC0 C7F7 9EE6 0CA7 AE55 5E19 6722 43C4 A03F 0EEE]
<address@hidden> <address@hidden>





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]