Re: [PATCH 3/18] gnu: Add python2-apipkg.

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 06:30:35PM -0800, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> New version.
> 

> From 03f8891a2635b6d8f349af0809547e75b9c0e112 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
> Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 18:04:18 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH 02/18] gnu: Add python2-apipkg.
> 
> * gnu/packages/python.scm (python2-apipkg): New variable.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/python.scm | 10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/python.scm b/gnu/packages/python.scm
> index 561f64a..ef91754 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/python.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/python.scm
> @@ -6852,7 +6852,15 @@ applications.")
>  package and greatly reduce the number of imports for your users.  It is a small
>  pure Python module that works on virtually all Python versions.")
>      (home-page "https://bitbucket.org/hpk42/apipkg")
> -    (license license:expat)))
> +    (license license:expat)
> +    (properties `((python2-variant . ,(delay python2-apipkg))))))
> +
> +(define-public python2-apipkg
> +  (package
> +    (inherit (package-with-python2
> +              (strip-python2-variant python-apipkg)))
> +    (native-inputs
> +     `(("python2-setuptools" ,python2-setuptools)))))

I noticed that python-apipkg uses unzip as a native-input, so this
variant would lose unzip. I tested it python-apipkg and it doesn't
*actually* need unzip to build... not sure why I thought it did. Would
you mind removing unzip from python-apipkg?

>  
>  (define-public python-execnet
>    (package
> -- 
> 2.6.3
>