[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#41574] gnu: Add intel-xev.
From: |
Marius Bakke |
Subject: |
[bug#41574] gnu: Add intel-xev. |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Jun 2020 21:55:03 +0200 |
elaexuotee@wilsonb.com writes:
> Marius,
>
> Thanks for taking a look at this.
>
>> Were these two downgrades intended? I'm assuming no, since the new
>> package don't appear to use them.
>
> Definitely not. Looks like I was sloppy with a local rebase. Thanks for
> catching this.
OK.
>> Does it work to use 'python-wrapper' instead of providing both Python 2
>> and Python 3 here?
>
> Beautiful; 'python-wrapper' is exactly what I was looking for.
Great.
>> Is the src output used for other things than documentation? If not, I
>> think we can drop it and let users do 'guix build --source intel-xed'
>> instead. The description should be modified accordingly.
>
> Sounds emminently reasonable to me.
The new patch still has a "src" output, even though it does not seem to
use it.
>> Apart from this the package LGTM. Probably it should have:
>>
>> (supported-systems '("x86_64-linux" "i686-linux"))
>>
>> too?
>
> I'm not so sure, actually. The tool and library simply facilitate translating
> to/from x86 opcodes, but as far as I can tell it doesn't actually *execute*
> any
> architecture-specific instructions.
OK.
>> Can you add a short description at the top of the patch file explaining
>> what it does any why?
>
> Oh, neat. I didn't know this was possible.
Nice job on the comment. :-)
>> Can you send an updated patch? Thanks!
>
> Done!
Looks like I missed a couple of things in the first round, sorry about
that. Here it comes...
> From a90ef5e79d863201d990d607c2926400654bfd9b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "B. Wilson" <elaexuotee@wilsonb.com>
> Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 07:32:28 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add intel-xed.
> To: guix-patches@gnu.org
>
> * gnu/packages/assembly.scm (intel-xed): New variable.
Please also mention the new patch and change to local.mk in the commit
message.
[...]
> +(define-public intel-xed
> + (package
> + (name "intel-xed")
> + (version "11.2.0")
> + (source
> + (origin
> + (method git-fetch)
> + (uri (git-reference
> + (url "https://github.com/intelxed/xed.git")
> + (commit "40125558530137444b4ee6fd26b445bfa105b543")))
Use the "11.2.0" tag here instead of the commit hash.
> + (sha256 (base32
> "1jffayski2gpd54vaska7fmiwnnia8v3cka4nfyzjgl8xsky9v2s"))
> + (file-name (git-file-name name version))
> + (patches (search-patches "intel-xed-fix-nondeterminism.patch"))))
> + (build-system gnu-build-system)
> + (native-inputs
> + `(("python-wrapper" ,python-wrapper)
> + ("tcsh" ,tcsh)
> + ("mbuild"
> + ,(let ((name "mbuild")
> + (version "0.2496"))
> + (origin
> + (method git-fetch)
> + (uri (git-reference
> + (url "https://github.com/intelxed/mbuild.git")
> + (commit "5304b94361fccd830c0e2417535a866b79c1c297")))
> + (sha256
> + (base32
> + "0r3avc3035aklqxcnc14rlmmwpj3jp09vbcbwynhvvmcp8srl7dl"))
> + (file-name (git-file-name name version)))))))
Can you add a comment about where you got that version number from?
Also, would it make sense to package this separately? Can be done later
though.
> + (outputs '("out" "lib" "src"))
As mentioned before, the 'src' output can go.
Apart from these minor issues, I think it's good to go. \o/
Can you send an updated patch? TIA! :-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature