[bug#54216] [PATCH v2] gnu: shepherd-for-guix: New package for use in Guix.

[zimoun]

Hi Attila,

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 20:42, Attila Lendvai <attila@lendvai.name> wrote:

> unfortunately, it won't help us much here, because one snippet modifies
> Makefile.am, while the other Makefile.in.

Guix does not have a clear line for patching (or I am not aware of the
update); what is going to source+snippet vs arguments+phase.  Pros and
cons for both; basically the question is what "guix build --source"
should return?

Option source+snippet means it returns the source of what Guix really
builds -- so many packages would not respect this rule of thumb.

Option arguments+phase means it returns the real unmodified upstream
source (modulo removal of non-free) -- so "guix shell -D foo" would
break for many packages.

Difficult tension. :-)  For most cases, not an unique answer; maybe
that's why we do not have a clear documentation. :-)  I just mention
it i.e., I am not saying you can do something. :-)  I am simply
pointing that Guix does not have a clear recommendation /
documentation where the patches should go; probably depending on their
nature.  Well, nothing related with your patch. :-)

That's said, personally, in this case, instead of having the Makefile*
patch in 'source', I would do the patching using a phase.

Cheers,
simon