From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement guix-package --upgrade
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:08:55 +0100
Message-ID: <878v6tyhc8.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87vc9yxcre.fsf@tines.lan> <87a9r9zwrv.fsf@gnu.org>
	<201302121104.57539.andreas@enge.fr>
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]:39621)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U5CnX-0002W0-Ne
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:09:21 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U5CnS-00028F-64
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:09:11 -0500
Received: from [2a01:e0b:1:123:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:271e] (port=38919
	helo=xanadu.aquilenet.fr) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1U5CnR-00026s-Vt
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:09:06 -0500
In-Reply-To: <201302121104.57539.andreas@enge.fr> (Andreas Enge's message of
	"Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:04:57 +0100")
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: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> Am Dienstag, 12. Februar 2013 schrieb Ludovic Court=C3=A8s:
>> It=E2=80=99s actually slightly more complex: you need to select those pa=
ckages
>> that are installed and for which either a newer version is available
>> (per =E2=80=98version-string>?=E2=80=99, see gnu-maintenance.scm; should=
 be moved to
>> utils.scm)
>
> This reminds me:
>    guix-package -i libjpeg
> still installs version 8d and not 9, so apparently, there is no check on=
=20
> the version number.

Indeed, we should fix it.

> And
>    guix-package -A jpeg
> prints
>    libjpeg 9       out     gnu/packages/libjpeg.scm:27:3
>    libjpeg 8d      out     gnu/packages/libjpeg.scm:27:3
> which is strange since libjpeg-9 is indeed defined around line 27, but=20
> libjpeg-8 comes later in the file.

Yes.  That=E2=80=99s because the record =E2=80=98libjpeg-8d=E2=80=99 =E2=80=
=9Cinherits=E2=80=9D from the other
one, so it takes its =E2=80=98location=E2=80=99 field unchanged.  Currently=
 you have to
explicitly add the =E2=80=98location=E2=80=99 field when inheriting:

  (location (source-properties->location (current-source-location)))

That=E2=80=99s inconvenient though, and perhaps =E2=80=98define-record-type=
*=E2=80=99 should be
extended to support non-inheritable fields.

Thoughts?

Ludo=E2=80=99.