Re: [ELPA] New package: dired-duplicates

[Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>]

Harald Judt <h.judt@gmx.at> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On 2023-11-04 at 16:27, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
>> Harald Judt <h.judt@gmx.at> writes:
>> 
>>> Am 03.11.23 um 09:19 schrieb Philip Kaludercic:
>>>> Harald Judt <h.judt@gmx.at> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Now, I think I have addressed all points from your feedback, how may I
>>>>> go on pushing a release? Simply increase the version number to 0.2 as
>>>>> you said in my codeberg repo?
>>>> In principle yes, but we haven't added the package yet.  Were there
>>>> any
>>>> outstanding issues that were not resolved?
>>>
>>> I do not think there are any outstanding issues left, I have fixed the
>>> things discussed here with the last 7 commits
>>> (https://codeberg.org/hjudt/dired-duplicates/commits/branch/main). Of
>>> course, there is Eli's proposal to use Emacs's primitives as a
>>> fallback, but I intend to implement this in a future version.
>> OK, I have added the package to GNU ELPA.  It should appear within
>> the
>> next day (you'll get an email, because your address is listed as the
>> maintainer).
>> 
>>> Harald
>
> Unfortunately, I got a mail that it failed to build and tried to
> follow the instructions locally but it also failed for me (likely due
> to some other issue here because it is missing a shared lib in a
> sandboxed environment?):
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> make build/dired-duplicates
> emacs --batch -l /mnt/scratch/work/elpa/admin/elpa-admin.el     \
>          -f elpaa-batch-make-one-package dired-duplicates
> ======== Building tarball
> archive-devel/dired-duplicates-0.1.0.20231105.3955.tar...
> Build error for
> archive-devel/dired-duplicates-0.1.0.20231105.3955.tar: (error
> "Error-indicating exit code in elpaa--call-sandboxed:
> emacs: error while loading shared libraries: libgccjit.so.0: cannot
> open shared object file: No such file or directory
> ")
> ######## Build of package
>          archive-devel/dired-duplicates-0.1.0.20231105.3955.tar
>         FAILED!!
> ======== Building tarball archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar...
> Build error for archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar: (error "Can’t find
> main file
> /mnt/scratch/work/elpa/packages/dired-duplicates/dired-duplicates.el
> file in /mnt/scratch/work/elpa/packages/dired-duplicates/")
> ######## Build of package archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar FAILED!!
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> The error I got by mail from ELPA is the following:
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The build scripts failed to build the tarball
> for version 0.1 of the package dired-duplicates.
> You can consult the latest error output in the file
> "dired-duplicates-build-failure.txt" in the GNU ELPA archive web site.
>
> You can also try and reproduce the error locally as follows:
>
>     git clone --single-branch https://git.sv.gnu.org/git/emacs/elpa.git
>     cd elpa
>     make                            # Setup the infrastructure
>     make packages/dired-duplicates  # Create a worktree of the package
>     make build/dired-duplicates     # Build the tarballs into archive(-devel)/
>
> ## The current error output was the following:
>
> ======== Building tarball archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar...
> Build error for archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar: (error "Can't find
> main file home/elpa/elpa/packages/dired-duplicates/dired-duplicates.el
> file in /home/elpa/elpa/packages/dired-duplicates")
> ######## Build of package archive/dired-duplicates-0.1.tar FAILED!!
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> When I look into the archive/dired-duplicates-build-failure.txt file
> the paths mentioned there seem correct.


Sorry for the late response; It appears that the package can now be
built (see https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/dired-duplicates.html), I had
the same issue as you describe on my local machine and now it appears to
be gone.  Perhaps this was resolved by your recent 0.2 commit?

>
>
> Regards,
> Harald