From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: bug#40039: 'wrap-script' introduces spurious argument
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:27:30 +0100
Message-ID: <87pnd4lm5p.fsf@elephly.net>
References: <87k13psl82.fsf@inria.fr>
 <2969f516-ca88-ffa6-dd65-f6a29682d42c@gmail.com>
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-mx.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34565)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jFxps-0002n1-1X
 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 06:28:05 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jFxpr-0003YT-1O
 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 06:28:03 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42636)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1jFxpq-0003Y3-Lt
 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 06:28:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jFxpq-0005P8-GG
 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 06:28:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.40039.B40039.158487286320734@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-reply-to: <2969f516-ca88-ffa6-dd65-f6a29682d42c@gmail.com>
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: <https://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-mx.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
To: Brendan Tildesley <brendan.tildesley@gmail.com>
Cc: 40039@debbugs.gnu.org


Brendan Tildesley <brendan.tildesley@gmail.com> writes:

> It appears the repeated (car cl) results in the executable path
> getting sent to it's self as the first argument. I'm not sure how
> things managed to work up until now? I tested the following change and
> it fixed the one case I was using, but am not sure it is correct. why
> was the cons (car cl) there in the first place?

See the documentation of execl:

 -- Scheme Procedure: execl filename arg ...
 -- C Function: scm_execl (filename, args)
     Executes the file named by FILENAME as a new process image.  The
     remaining arguments are supplied to the process; from a C program
     they are accessible as the =E2=80=98argv=E2=80=99 argument to =E2=80=
=98main=E2=80=99.
     Conventionally the first ARG is the same as FILENAME.  All
     arguments must be strings.

     If ARG is missing, FILENAME is executed with a null argument list,
     which may have system-dependent side-effects.

     This procedure is currently implemented using the =E2=80=98execv=E2=80=
=99 system
     call, but we call it =E2=80=98execl=E2=80=99 because of its Scheme cal=
ling
     interface.

--=20
Ricardo