[bug#40485] Acknowledgement (gnu: Update libxfce4ui to 4.15.2.)

[Naga Malleswari]

Hi Danny

Is there a suggestion how to work on this.


Meanwhile i submitted another patch, please review

http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=40546


On 10/04/20 3:41 am, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 02:12:42 +0530
> Naga Malleswari <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On 09/04/20 3:49 am, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
>>> + (inherit libxfce4ui-1)
>>> +    (name "libxfce4ui") ; not necessary but I like it for no reason
>>> +    (version "4.15.2")
>>> +    (source (origin ; necessary block!!  
>> I used the same. I added name block. It worked !!!
>> 1) If name block is removed in the latest [libxfce4ui package], it's 
>> building the
>> older version. Why??
> If I remove (name "libxfce4ui") from the latest libxfce4ui package, and then
> invoke
>
>   make -j5 SUBDIRS=
>
> then I get an error
>
>   error: name: unbound variable.
>
> from the compilation of gnu/packages/xfce.scm.
> So that's why the latest libxfce4ui package would never be loaded into guix
> (it's broken) and instead the other one would be used.
>
> I'm not sure why that is the case.  It's certainly different to most other
> programming languages.  @Ludo?
>
> @Ludo: Reduced test case:
>
>   ,use (guix packages)
>   (define-public a
>     (package
>       (name "a")
>       (version name)
>       (source #f) (build-system #f) (synopsis #f) (description #f) (license 
> #f) (home-page #f)))
>
>   (define-public b
>     (package
>       (inherit a)
>       (version name))) ; error message here
>
> Error message:
>
>   ;;; <stdin>:9:4: warning: possibly unbound variable `name'
>   <unnamed port>:9:4: In procedure module-lookup: Unbound variable: name
>
> What's happening here?  I would have expected NAME to be available from the
> descendant record and accessing the ancestor record... is it not available
> on purpose?
>
>> 2)  /latest is also removed from variable. Would it make a difference?
> No.  It's just part of a variable's name (the slash has no special meaning
> either).

-- 
Regards
NagaMalli