From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>, Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>
Cc: blake@reproduciblemedia.com,
"Julien Lepiller" <julien@lepiller.eu>,
Ludovic_Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>,
"Philip McGrath" <philip@philipmcgrath.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] doc: Update contribution guidelines on patches, etc.
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2022 08:55:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1dcca575580624ddcc208883ee62d8c75f908139.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2fe4881ad87876ae70ef4f3340b34d589a65bb71.camel@gmail.com>
* doc/contributing.texi ("Snippets versus Phases"): Replaced with...
("Modifying Sources"): ... this. List more use cases and some principles.
---
doc/contributing.texi | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 95 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/contributing.texi b/doc/contributing.texi
index 02c7c5ae59..af97d37f34 100644
--- a/doc/contributing.texi
+++ b/doc/contributing.texi
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ needed is to review and apply the patch.
* Package Naming:: What's in a name?
* Version Numbers:: When the name is not enough.
* Synopses and Descriptions:: Helping users find the right package.
-* Snippets versus Phases:: Whether to use a snippet, or a build phase.
+* Modifying Sources:: When to use patches, snippets, or build phases.
* Emacs Packages:: Your Elisp fix.
* Python Modules:: A touch of British comedy.
* Perl Modules:: Little pearls.
@@ -698,20 +698,102 @@ Gettext}):
for the X11 resize-and-rotate (RandR) extension. @dots{}")
@end lisp
-@node Snippets versus Phases
-@subsection Snippets versus Phases
+@node Modifying Sources
+@subsection Modifying Sources
+@cindex patches, when to use
@cindex snippets, when to use
-The boundary between using an origin snippet versus a build phase to
-modify the sources of a package can be elusive. Origin snippets are
-typically used to remove unwanted files such as bundled libraries,
-nonfree sources, or to apply simple substitutions. The source derived
-from an origin should produce a source that can be used to build the
-package on any system that the upstream package supports (i.e., act as
-the corresponding source). In particular, origin snippets must not
-embed store items in the sources; such patching should rather be done
-using build phases. Refer to the @code{origin} record documentation for
-more information (@pxref{origin Reference}).
+
+Guix has three main ways of modifying the source code of a package,
+that you as a packager may use. Each one has its strengths and
+drawbacks, along with intended and historically derived use cases.
+These are
+
+@table @b
+
+@item patches
+If your package has a bug that takes multiple lines to fix, or a fix
+has already been accepted upstream, patches are the preferred way of
+eliminating said bug. Refer to the @code{origin} record documentation
+(particularly the fields @code{patches}, @code{patch-inputs}, and
+@code{patch-flags}) for more information on how to use patches
+(@pxref{origin Reference}).
+When adding a patch, do not forget to also list it in
+@code{dist_patch_DATA} of @file{gnu/local.mk}
+
+As patches are applied to the origin of a package, they become part
+of the corresponding source. You can retrieve this source by
+invoking @code{guix build -S YOUR_PACKAGE}. This also means that
+modifying the patch causes two rebuilds: one for the source and one
+for the package built from it.
+
+Patches are limited in that they lack the expressiveness of Guile.
+If all changes are constrained to single lines, a patch might be much
+larger than the equivalent @code{substitute*}. It is further bad form
+to use a single patch to address multiple unrelated issues, whereas
+snippets can take ``multiple jobs''.
+
+@item snippets
+If your package contains non-free sources, these need to be removed
+through a snippet. This snippet should not only remove the sources in
+question, but also references to the removed sources in build scripts,
+documentation, and so on. @ref{Software Freedom}
+
+If your package bundles external libraries, snippets are the preferred
+way of removing said them. Unlike with non-free sources, it is not a
+requirement to remove @emph{all} bundled libraries, although doing so
+is very much preferred. Bundled libraries that are kept should be
+clearly indicated, preferrably with a reason as to why the bundled copy
+remains. As with non-free sources, references to the removed libraries
+should also be updated in the snippet.
+
+Refer to the @code{origin} record documentation
+(particularly the fields @code{snippet} and @code{modules}), for more
+information on how to use snippets (@pxref{origin Reference}).
+
+While snippets have all of Guile's core as well as extra @code{modules}
+available, their most useful procedure for @emph{editing} sources
+(rather than removing them), is @code{substitute*}, which can not deal
+with multi-line changes that well. Like patches, snippets become part
+of the corresponding source.
+
+@item build phases
+For modifications that retain the intended functionality of the
+package, build phases (usually between @code{unpack} and
+@code{configure}, sometimes between @code{configure} and @code{build})
+can be used. Such changes include, but are not limited to, fixes of the
+build script(s) or embeddings of store paths (e.g. replacement of
+@file{/bin/sh} with @code{(search-input-file inputs "bin/sh")}).
+
+If you need to embed a store path, do so only inside a build phase.
+A workaround for patches that span multiple lines, is to use a variable
+such as @code{@@store_path@@} inside the patch and substitute the actual
+store path at build time via @code{substitute*}.
+
+Unlike patches and snippets, build phases do @b{not} become part of
+the corresponding source of a package, and should thus be avoided for
+changes that result in observably different runtime behaviour.
+On the other hand, the reduced overhead of unpacking, repacking and
+unpacking again might make for a slightly more pleasant debugging
+experience.
+
+@end table
+
+If your change does not neatly fit in any of the categories above, it
+is usually a matter of preference or convenience.
+
+As part of a build phase, you may further want to use
+@b{auxiliary files}, for instance to add new source files. As a matter
+of principle, auxiliary files ought to be preferred over an equivalent
+@code{display} or @code{format} when creating non-trivial files, as that
+makes them easier to edit. The exact threshold for a non-trivial file
+might be subjective, though it should lie somewhere between 10~20 lines.
+
+Auxiliary files are stored in the @file{gnu/packages/aux-files}
+directory and can be retrieved in a snippet or build phase via
+@code{search-auxiliary-file}.
+When adding an auxiliary file, do not forget to also list it in
+@code{AUX_FILES} of @file{Makefile.am}.
@node Emacs Packages
@subsection Emacs Packages
--
2.37.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-10 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-25 3:17 A proposal of a consistent set of clear rules and guidelines involving snippets, phases and patches Maxime Devos
2022-07-25 5:21 ` Julien Lepiller
2022-07-25 11:18 ` Maxime Devos
2022-07-25 11:37 ` Julien Lepiller
2022-08-04 8:51 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-05 3:23 ` Philip McGrath
2022-08-05 8:13 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-05 3:38 ` Philip McGrath
2022-08-05 8:09 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-05 10:18 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-05 13:59 ` v2: " Maxime Devos
2022-08-06 6:55 ` [PATCH] doc: Update contribution guidelines on patches, etc Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-08-06 6:55 ` Liliana Marie Prikler [this message]
2022-09-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v2] " Ludovic Courtès
2022-09-02 18:05 ` Maxime Devos
2022-09-05 9:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-09-05 13:12 ` Maxime Devos
2022-09-05 16:05 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-09 16:45 ` [PATCH] " Maxime Devos
2022-08-09 17:05 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-08-09 18:19 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-09 19:08 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-08-09 20:30 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-10 4:25 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-08-09 20:40 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-08 21:51 ` v2: A proposal of a consistent set of clear rules and guidelines involving snippets, phases and patches Andreas Enge
2022-08-09 15:06 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-09 17:10 ` Andreas Enge
2022-09-05 13:03 ` Maxime Devos
2022-09-07 12:17 ` Andreas Enge
2022-09-07 18:08 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-09 18:58 ` david larsson
2022-08-09 20:53 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-10 11:23 ` david larsson
2022-08-05 16:59 ` blake
2022-08-09 16:30 ` Maxime Devos
2022-09-05 14:06 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-10 6:10 ` blake
2022-08-10 9:06 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-10 10:33 ` blake
2022-08-10 10:44 ` Maxime Devos
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1dcca575580624ddcc208883ee62d8c75f908139.camel@gmail.com \
--to=liliana.prikler@gmail.com \
--cc=blake@reproduciblemedia.com \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=julien@lepiller.eu \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=maximedevos@telenet.be \
--cc=philip@philipmcgrath.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).