[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#44032] [PATCH] gnu: ocaml: Update to 4.11.1
From: |
zimoun |
Subject: |
[bug#44032] [PATCH] gnu: ocaml: Update to 4.11.1 |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:24:23 +0200 |
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 16:11, Julien Lepiller <julien@lepiller.eu> wrote:
> >> +(define-public ocaml4.09-csexp
> >> + (package
> >> + (inherit ocaml-csexp)
> >> + (name "ocaml4.09-csexp")
> >> + (arguments
> >> + `(#:ocaml ,ocaml-4.09
> >> + #:findlib ,ocaml4.09-findlib
> >> + ,@(substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments
> >ocaml-csexp)
> >> + ((#:dune _) (package-with-ocaml4.09 dune-bootstrap)))))
> >> + (propagated-inputs
> >> + `(("ocaml-result" ,(package-with-ocaml4.09 ocaml-result))))))
> >
> >You do not use the one you define below. Why? Other said, do you
> >really need 'ocaml4.09.result' defined below?
>
> Actually, the properties ensure that I actually use the one below :)
I am not sure. You are recreating a package based on 'ocaml-result'
and not using the package 'ocaml4.09-result'. Or I miss something
about the symbols.
> >> +(define-public ocaml4.09-result
> >> + (package
> >> + (inherit ocaml-result)
> >> + (arguments
> >> + `(#:test-target "."
> >> + #:dune ,(package-with-ocaml4.09 dune-bootstrap)
> >> + #:ocaml ,ocaml-4.09
> >> + #:findlib ,ocaml4.09-findlib))))
> >
> >Since the name is not changed after inheritance, this package is
> >ambiguous. And possibly do not compile.
>
> Ah right, thanks!
Moreover, my point is: you are using
once:
(properties `((ocaml4.09-variant . ,(delay ocaml4.09-result))))
and once:
`(("ocaml-result" ,(package-with-ocaml4.09 ocaml-result))))))
and it seems easier to only use one form. Other said, maybe you do
not need the new 'ocaml4.09-result' and '(package-with-ocaml4.09
ocaml-result)' is enough.
> >> - `(#:phases
> >> + `(#:tests? #f; no tests
> >
> >Why? Because the tests are run during the build? If yes, does it make
> >sense to move the comment there?
>
> No, the comment might have come from a previous version or just copied by
> mistake. There is really no test in this package (unless there's something
> weird going on with oasis scripts).
Maybe reword the comment: "no test provided by the package"or
something like that.
All the best,
simon