From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: lsof
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 22:55:24 +0100
Message-ID: <201303042255.24371.andreas@enge.fr>
References: <201303031138.56305.andreas@enge.fr> <87haks18zd.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36306)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1UCdM8-0001VE-Oy
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 16:55:42 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1UCdM5-0000lp-6j
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 16:55:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87haks18zd.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Am Sonntag, 3. M=C3=A4rz 2013 schrieb Ludovic Court=C3=A8s:
> Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:
> > the lsof tarball contains the source in a two-stage process: After
> > unpacking, one is left with lsof_4.87_src.tar, which needs to be
> > unpacked as well.
> Weird.

I have seen it before, the tarball contains the source tarball and some=20
additional metadata.

> > But apparently, NAME and VERSION are not passed through as function
> > arguments (they are #f). Would it make sense to changes this?
> It wouldn=E2=80=99t hurt to pass them, and it may be helpful in cases lik=
e this.
> So feel free to add it to build-system/gnu.scm and gnu-build-system.scm.

This looks complicated after all: One would probably need to repeat NAME=20
and VERSION in the arguments section of a package; source seems to be=20
passed automatically. And then there is the semantic difference between the=
=20
name of a derivation and the name of a package...

> > Or do you see a preferable way of doing the second stage unpacking?
> You could use (find-files "." "\\.tar$") to find the tar file, I guess.

Thanks, I will rather go for this!

Andreas