[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#43193] [PATCH] guix: Add --with-dependency-source option
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
[bug#43193] [PATCH] guix: Add --with-dependency-source option |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Sep 2020 17:43:09 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357@gmail.com> skribis:
>> Could you:
>>
>> 1. adjust doc/guix.texi accordingly? That is, if we rename this new
>> option to ‘--with-source’, simply add a note stating that it’s
>> recursive.
> I included this in the attached patch.
>> 2. add a test to tests/guix-build.sh? There are already --with-source
>> tests in other files. You can mimic them, essentially to make sure
>> the option has an effect.
>> 3. optionally add an entry as a separate commit to
>> etc/news.scm. I can do that for you if you want.
>>
> Do you still think the tests should be updated and this change should
> be announced in the news file? I'm willing to do these.
Yes, please. There’s should be a test that checks that --with-source
works for non-leaf packages. A new entry would also be nice.
> From 2786da1e7011c59f08fc150dfa284f35bc0ed093 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357+guix@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 17:45:08 -0600
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] guix: Make --with-source option recursive
>
> * guix/scripts/build.scm: (transform-package-inputs/source): new
> function
> (evaluate-source-replacement-specs): new function
> (%transformations): change with-source to use
> evaluate-source-replacement-specs
>
> *doc/guix.texi (Package Transformation Options): Document it.
Nitpick: There are spacing and capitalization issues. Please see ‘git
log’ for examples.
> +++ b/doc/guix.texi
> @@ -9129,7 +9129,8 @@ without having to type in the definitions of package
> variants
> @itemx --with-source=@var{package}=@var{source}
> @itemx --with-source=@var{package}@@@var{version}=@var{source}
> Use @var{source} as the source of @var{package}, and @var{version} as
> -its version number.
> +its version number. This replacement is applied recursively on all
> +dependencies only if PACKAGE is specified.
s/PACKAGE/@var{package}/
However, the semantics are a bit “weird”. I would just do the recursive
replacement thing unconditionally. WDYT?
> +(define (transform-package-inputs/source replacement-specs)
> + "Return a procedure that, when passed a package, replaces its direct
> +dependencies according to REPLACEMENT-SPECS. REPLACEMENT-SPECS is a list of
> +strings like \"guile=/path/to/source\" or
> +\"guile=https://www.example.com/guile-source.tar.gz\" meaning that, any
> +dependency on a package called \"guile\" must be replaced with a dependency
> on a
> +\"guile\" built with the source at the specified location."
> + (match (string-tokenize (car replacement-specs) %not-equal)
> + ((spec url)
s/url/file/ since it’s a file name.
> + (lambda (store obj)
> + (let* ((replacements (evaluate-source-replacement-specs
> replacement-specs
> + (lambda (old
> url)
> +
> (package-with-source store old url))))
> + (rewrite (package-input-rewriting/spec replacements))
> + (rewrite* (lambda (obj)
> + (rewrite obj))))
> + (if (package? obj)
> + (rewrite* obj)
> + obj))))
> + ((url)
> + (transform-package-source replacement-specs))))
So maybe drop the second clause for non-recursive replacement, and drop
‘transform-package-source’ as well.
Thanks!
Ludo’.