From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#63336: [PATCH] package-vc: Process :make and :shell-command spec args Date: Sun, 14 May 2023 07:44:16 +0000 Message-ID: <87ilcvichb.fsf@posteo.net> References: <874joprxmx.fsf@breatheoutbreathe.in> <87jzxkecnk.fsf@posteo.net> <87pm7b7up0.fsf@breatheoutbreathe.in> <877ctghey0.fsf@posteo.net> <873540rqkm.fsf@breatheoutbreathe.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23882"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 63336@debbugs.gnu.org To: Joseph Turner Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 14 09:45:28 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1py6Q4-00060I-4M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 09:45:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1py6Pk-00005w-9D; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:45:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1py6Pe-0008V4-T6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:45:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1py6Pe-0003iS-IY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:45:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1py6Pe-0007Et-F3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:45:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Philip Kaludercic Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 14 May 2023 07:45:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 63336 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 63336-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B63336.168405026727759 (code B ref 63336); Sun, 14 May 2023 07:45:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 63336) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 May 2023 07:44:27 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40232 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1py6P5-0007De-1A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:44:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:34769) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1py6P2-0007DJ-2q for 63336@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2023 03:44:26 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1B2524010B for <63336@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 14 May 2023 09:44:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1684050257; bh=XpWW9/XMzpk18TAROaUvaUemmr8Am0Q2Eax9CEYSImE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=frU6zbzMkaxJFi1SsURQUTDZI1/K8Z7GMFJ0hFpGb+S5x2DOQ3MJishWHKsfs1206 14BD0eiseNTow1Q0xa3WgAUN9ivdVW+tEa776zyu5NyJmXBjTTqQpac0UoRAIf0RgI 31Tk0kak+lHolLqjOXnqv2FsqL7xKERphMTCjLgNIYbCndAk3civZ6q0O2DkSEphcb mqfOlhr8ciPzzURuDDt2ZBHl7xgPElmDsoXxBgWwIQWCPaysqq+pB8pPU1J2SNWuvm DgyIfJZTA3mgSmY5nb9AOK5GYsQb7SXs8rcQm7jAVyhsNzqqt3EzaWKuooUZzoaHQq 3P44TcTNMRN1w== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4QJvds1qwyz6tv5; Sun, 14 May 2023 09:44:17 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <873540rqkm.fsf@breatheoutbreathe.in> (Joseph Turner's message of "Wed, 10 May 2023 18:37:15 -0700") Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; keydata= mDMEZBBQQhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAHJuofBrfqFh12uQu0Yi7mrl525F28eTmwUDflFNmdui0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEDg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwMFCQHhM4AFCwkI BwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwulikAEA77hloUiSrXgFkUVJhlKBpLCHUjA0 mWZ9j9w5d08+jVwBAK6c4iGP7j+/PhbkxaEKa4V3MzIl7zJkcNNjHCXmvFcEuDgEZBBQQhIKKwYB BAGXVQEFAQEHQI5NLiLRjZy3OfSt1dhCmFyn+fN/QKELUYQetiaoe+MMAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEE Dg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwwFCQHhM4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwukm+wEA8cml4JpK NeAu65rg+auKrPOP6TP/4YWRCTIvuYDm0joBALw98AMz7/qMHvSCeU/hw9PL6u6R2EScxtpKnWof z4oM X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:261707 Archived-At: Joseph Turner writes: > Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> Joseph Turner writes: >> >>>>> +(defun package-vc--make (pkg-spec dir) >>>>> + "Process :make and :shell-command spec arguments." >>>>> + (let ((target (plist-get pkg-spec :make)) >>>>> + (cmd (plist-get pkg-spec :shell-command))) >>>>> + (when (or cmd target) >>>>> + (with-current-buffer (get-buffer-create " *package-vc make*") >>>> ^ >>>> should the package name >>>> be mentioned here? >>> >>> I like this idea, but IIUC package-vc--make would then need to take an >>> extra arg, since pkg-spec doesn't contain the :name of the package. We >>> could also add :name to the pkg-spec plist? >> >> I wouldn't be in favour of that, I think that passing the name as a >> separate argument would be a better solution. > > I agree. > >>> For comparison, package-vc--build-documentation creates a buffer called >>> " *package-vc doc*" without the package name. >> >> The difference I see here is that documentation usually builds fine, >> while :make or :shell-command have a higher chance of failing because >> some software is missing, especially if people don't use :make the way >> it is used on the ELPA server but to build external dependencies (I'm >> thinking of mail clients like notmuch) > > That makes sense to me. In the attached patch, I pass pkg-desc to > package-vc--make instead just name. > > Want me to submit a separate patch which adds the package name to the > " *package-vc doc*" buffer name? No, I don't think it is necessary. But thanks. >>>>> + target (buffer-name))))))) >>>>> + >>>>> (declare-function org-export-to-file "ox" (backend file)) >>>>> >>>>> (defun package-vc--build-documentation (pkg-desc file) >>>>> @@ -486,6 +515,9 @@ documentation and marking the package as installed." >>>>> ;; Generate package file >>>>> (package-vc--generate-description-file pkg-desc pkg-file) >>>>> >>>>> + ;; Process :make and :shell-command arguments before building documentation >>>>> + (when package-vc-process-make (package-vc--make pkg-spec pkg-dir)) >>>> >>>> Wasn't the plan to allow `package-vc-process-make' to either be a >>>> generic "build-anything" or a selective listing of packages where we >>>> allow :make and :shell-command to be executed? >>> >>> Let me know if the attached commit accomplishes what you had in mind. >> >> Yes, that (or rather the newest version from a different message) looks good. >> >>>>> + >>>>> ;; Detect a manual >>>>> (when (executable-find "install-info") >>>>> (dolist (doc-file (ensure-list (plist-get pkg-spec :doc))) >>>> >>>> Otherwise this looks good, but I haven't tried it out yet. >>> >>> I fixed up a couple other issues: >>> >>> - removed unnecessary dir arg to package-vc--make >>> - added function arg to the docstring for package-vc--make >>> >>> I'm not sure if the customization type for package-vc-process-make is >>> correct. Please double check that. >>> >>> Also, should users be able to run :make and :shell-command args defined >>> in a spec passed into package-vc-install? >> >> Yes, is that currently not supported? > > Nevermind! It is supported. I didn't notice that package-vc--unpack adds > the user-defined pkg-spec to package-vc-selected-packages just before > calling package-vc--unpack-1. 1+ > Best, > > Joseph > > From b27724197acd4ee72f9d336843f0e6ed9fcee87b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Joseph Turner > Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 10:05:04 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] package-vc: Process :make and :shell-command spec args > > --- > lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el > index beca0bd00e2..8529d1dad5c 100644 > --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el > +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el > @@ -344,6 +344,33 @@ asynchronously." > "\n") > nil pkg-file nil 'silent)))) > > +(defcustom package-vc-process-make nil Have we discussed the name of this user option? I feel it is too immediate, and therefore not intuitively obvious what purpose it serves. I would imagine something along the lines of "package-vc-allow-side-effects" or "package-vc-permit-building" could be better? WDYT? > + "Whether to process :make and :shell-command spec arguments. I guess here too an explanation would be warranted (and in the manual). Explaining what the issue is, and why one might be wary to enable the option. > +When set to a list of symbols (packages), run commands for only > +packages in the list. When `nil', never run commands. Otherwise > +when non-`nil', run commands for any package with :make or > +:shell-command specified. > + > +Package specs are loaded from trusted package archives." > + :type '(choice (const :tag "Run for all packages" t) > + (repeat :tag "Run only for selected packages" (symbol :tag "Package name")) > + (const :tag "Never run" nil)) > + :version "30.1") > + > +(defun package-vc--make (pkg-spec pkg-desc) > + "Process :make and :shell-command PKG-SPEC arguments for PKG-DESC." > + (let ((target (plist-get pkg-spec :make)) > + (cmd (plist-get pkg-spec :shell-command))) > + (when (or cmd target) > + (with-current-buffer (get-buffer-create I'd format the buffer name in the top let to prevent this line-break here. > + (format " *package-vc make %s*" (package-desc-name pkg-desc))) > + (erase-buffer) > + (when (and cmd (/= 0 (call-process shell-file-name nil t nil shell-command-switch cmd))) > + (warn "Failed to run %s, see buffer %S" cmd (buffer-name))) > + (when (and target (/= 0 (apply #'call-process "make" nil t nil (if (consp target) target (list target))))) > + (warn "Failed to make %s, see buffer %S" target (buffer-name))))))) If :shell-command fails, do we really want to proceed to :make? > (declare-function org-export-to-file "ox" (backend file)) > > (defun package-vc--build-documentation (pkg-desc file) > @@ -486,6 +513,16 @@ documentation and marking the package as installed." > ;; Generate package file > (package-vc--generate-description-file pkg-desc pkg-file) > > + ;; Process :make and :shell-command arguments before building documentation > + (pcase package-vc-process-make > + ((pred consp) ; When non-`nil' list, check if package is on the list. > + (when (memq (package-desc-name pkg-desc) package-vc-process-make) > + (package-vc--make pkg-spec pkg-desc))) > + ('nil ; When `nil', do nothing. > + nil) Perhaps swap the two conditions, first checking nil then listp which I think reads more natural. Then again, is pcase actually serving anything here? > + (_ ; When otherwise non-`nil', run commands. > + (package-vc--make pkg-spec pkg-desc))) > + > ;; Detect a manual > (when (executable-find "install-info") > (dolist (doc-file (ensure-list (plist-get pkg-spec :doc)))