From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Vong Subject: Re: Octave & QtOctave Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 13:30:20 +0800 Message-ID: <878t13mdcj.fsf@gmail.com> References: <875zwnqomz.fsf@posteo.net> <87a7lyzkk2.fsf@gmail.com> <20181124221022.ankjuz4mdpkoohkn@abyayala> <87k1l1w3n0.fsf@gnu.org> <87in0ijtku.fsf@posteo.net> <87va4h5vhr.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7lnk9sb.fsf@posteo.net> <871s6xz894.fsf@gmail.com> <87woopovyk.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41462) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gUmFJ-0005gU-57 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:30:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gUmFD-00030P-2Q for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:30:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87woopovyk.fsf@posteo.net> (Kei Kebreau's message of "Tue, 04 Dec 2018 15:53:07 -0500") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Kei Kebreau Cc: guix-devel --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Kei Kebreau writes: > Alex Vong writes: > >> Hello Kei, >> >> Kei Kebreau writes: >> >> [...] >>> >>> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed. >>> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave? >> >> I think some additional changes related to "(assoc-ref inputs ..." >> needed to be made. Otherwise, looks good to me! Here is a patch I made >> earlier but it was not tested, feel free to cherry-pick what is needed: >> >> From 2b04caa66c17da257dfb4f4ccb94e8d629b95e53 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Alex Vong >> Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 03:39:40 +0800 >> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Rename "octave" to "octave-cli" and "qtoctave" to >> "octave". >> >> * gnu/packages/maths.scm (octave): Rename to octave-cli. >> [name]: Change to "octave-cli". >> (qtoctave): Rename to octave. >> [name]: Change to "octave". >> [inherit]: Inherit from octave-cli. >> [source]: Likewise. >> [inputs]: Likewise. >> [native-inputs]: Likewise. >> [arguments]: Likewise. >> (flann): Update accordingly. >> * gnu/packages/engineering.scm (qucs): Likewise. >> (qucs-s): Likewise. >> * gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm (shogun): Likewise. > > ... > >> - ("octave" ,octave) >> + ("octave-cli" ,octave-cli) > > I see the main difference is that you've replace the package's > associated string to "octave-cli" as well as the name, whereas I've only > replaced the package name. Should I replace the associated package > string, too? According to the manual "6.7.2 Package Naming", the associated string is used for package management commands such as 'guix package' and 'guix build'. Therefore, I think we should change them as well, so that the users can install the packages using the command "guix package -i octave-cli" and "guix package -i octave" respectively. What do you think? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYIAB0WIQQwb8uPLAHCXSnTBVZh71Au9gJS8gUCXAiz7AAKCRBh71Au9gJS 8sHTAQCZpTtaJYoAL86dOJ5+LkPRPJr8EDGbXpO6RZ57Emv+sQD/XJBieDnxBlRB X1yWteusIrAUZHkLXkOmVhMZciGBIAE= =A2KB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--