bug#63043: texlive-font-maps.drv build failure when profiles lacks texlive-* packages

[Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>]

Hi Ludovic,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>>> There were cases (like GDK pixbuf, GLib schemas, and all that) where the idea
>>> was to take whichever glib/GDK we’d find in the dependency graph, and
>>> pick the command we need from it.  That way, we wouldn’t introduce any
>>> additional dependency.  That was the reasoning.
>>>
>>> Thinking about, this particular case might be easier: we can make things
>>> consistent like so:
>
> [...]
>
>>> +    (if (and texlive-base (pair? texlive-inputs))
>>>          (gexp->derivation "texlive-font-maps" build
>>>                            #:substitutable? #f
>>>                            #:local-build? #t
>>>
>>>
>>> That way, the hook only fire if we have ‘texlive-base’ (somewhere in the
>>> graph) *and* we have texlive-* packages in the manifest.
>>
>> That is equivalent, but it doesn't address the core problem in my
>> opinion.  There's no use to run hooks for things which aren't propagated
>> at the level of the profile, I think.  If texlive-base in is the
>> profile, the person wants to use tex and friends.  But if it's wrapped
>> by some package deep down, we shouldn't care.
>>
>> I see it the same way as when using libraries and compilers in a
>> profile; the compiler (consumer) needs to be present else no search path
>> is created.
>>
>> Does it make sense?
>
> I agree with the reasoning; I think it doesn’t apply to the GLib schemas
> and GDK pixbuf caches though.

It does, for the simple reasons that both GDK pixbufs and GLib schemas
are collected using manifest-inputs, which means only direct inputs from
the profile and the ones they propagate.  So if you look deep in the
profile graph for the 'glib-compile-schemas' command, there is a chance
that it is found while no schemas were collected, and this is the kind
of case that'd lead to an empty derivation output (because there's no
schema to compile).

> For TeX Live font maps, maybe it applies, though I’m not entirely sure
> (I wouldn’t be surprised if things other than ‘texlive-base’ are
> consumers of font maps).  Plus, since the patch I proposed is simple,
> I’m inclined to just do that.
>
> Thoughts?

I still think that my proposition is better, but I don't mind if you
apply your fix now and we revisit this at a later time.  If we get to
it, this change could be reverted as it wouldn't be necessary anymore.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim