Re: valgrind

[zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 12:01, Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> wrote:

> (define-public valgrind
>   (package
>     (name "valgrind")
>     (version "3.17.0")
>     (properties '((hidden? . #t)))))
>
> (define-public valgrind/interactive
>   (package/inherit
>    valgrind
>    (version "3.17.0")
>
> (define-public valgrind-3.20
>   (package
>     (inherit valgrind/interactive)
>     (version "3.20.0")

> Is version 3.17 really needed? Is the distinction between the hidden package
> and the "interactive" package still important?

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix refresh -l -e '(@ (gnu packages valgrind) valgrind)'
Building the following 544 packages would ensure 1085 dependent packages are rebuilt:
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I guess, the symbol ’valgrind’ refers to a minimal version of Valgrind
used by many packages.  Well, I guess again that ’valgrind-minimal’
could be a better name. :-)

Both ’valgrind/interactive’ and ’valgrind-3.20’ provides what user
expects with Valgrind but at 2 different versions.

Is the package ’valgrind/interactive’ accessible with valgrind@3.17
needed?  Indeed, maybe it could be dropped, especially if it is broken
for some use-case.


Cheers,
simon