From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: GNOME updater Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 18:33:39 +0100 Message-ID: <87bn9zo7bg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87twntsx0y.fsf@gnu.org> <20151208151811.7e16a0f0@debian-netbook> <87a8pl9dqc.fsf@gnu.org> <20151209121225.538fb6e7@debian-netbook> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34133) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a6icd-0003Pz-Cd for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:33:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a6icZ-000755-4m for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:33:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20151209121225.538fb6e7@debian-netbook> (Efraim Flashner's message of "Wed, 9 Dec 2015 12:12:25 +0200") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Efraim Flashner Cc: Guix-devel --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Efraim Flashner skribis: > On Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:11:55 +0100 > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) wrote: > >> Efraim Flashner skribis: >>=20 >> > A for gnome-3, the 3.19 series AFAIK is the beta/development releases = for >> > 3.20, so would we want to update to those numbers?=20=20 >>=20 >> Good point, we probably don=E2=80=99t want those. >>=20 >> Fixed in c499125, which leads to a shorter list: >>=20 >>[snip] >=20=20 > it might need a bit more work. For example, vte is at 0.40.0 and current > upstream is 0.43.0, but presumably there is a 0.42.x release in there > somewhere. Or at least for gnome-mines and -terminal, I'm sure there's a = 3.18 > release between our 3.16.x and upstream 3.19.x. > > I tried a bit at the logic but wasn't able to quickly figure something ou= t. > As a test at-spi2-atk in gtk.scm can be upgraded to 2.18.3. With the patch below, here=E2=80=99s what I get: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ ./pre-inst-env guix refresh at-spi2-core gtk+ gnome-mines vte gnome-termi= nal=20 gnu/packages/gnome.scm:2168:13: gnome-terminal would be upgraded from 3.16.= 0 to 3.18.2 gnu/packages/gnome.scm:1687:13: vte would be upgraded from 0.40.0 to 0.42.1 gnu/packages/gnome.scm:2122:13: gnome-mines would be upgraded from 3.16.0 t= o 3.18.2 gnu/packages/gtk.scm:573:12: gtk+ would be upgraded from 3.18.2 to 3.18.6 gnu/packages/gtk.scm:437:12: at-spi2-core would be upgraded from 2.18.1 to = 2.18.3 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- That looks good now, no? --=-=-= Content-Type: text/x-patch Content-Disposition: inline diff --git a/guix/gnu-maintenance.scm b/guix/gnu-maintenance.scm index 910270f..fb54036 100644 --- a/guix/gnu-maintenance.scm +++ b/guix/gnu-maintenance.scm @@ -328,8 +328,8 @@ pairs. Example: (\"mit-scheme-9.0.1\" . \"/gnu/mit-scheme/stable.pkg/9.0.1\"). under DIRECTORY, or #f. Use FTP-OPEN and FTP-CLOSE to open (resp. close) FTP connections; this can be useful to reuse connections. -KEEP-FILE? is a predicate to decide whether to consider a given file (source -tarball) as a valid candidate based on its name. +KEEP-FILE? is a predicate to decide whether to enter a directory and to +consider a given file (source tarball) as a valid candidate based on its name. FILE->SIGNATURE must be a procedure; it is passed a source file URL and must return the corresponding signature URL, or #f it signatures are unavailable." @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ return the corresponding signature URL, or #f it signatures are unavailable." (("w32" 'directory . _) #f) (((? contains-digit? dir) 'directory . _) - dir) + (and (keep-file? dir) dir)) (_ #f)) entries)) @@ -480,14 +480,13 @@ elpa.gnu.org, and all the GNOME packages." (match (string-tokenize (version-major+minor version) %not-dot) (((= string->number major) (= string->number minor)) - (even? minor)) + (and minor (even? minor))) (_ #t))) ;cross fingers - (define (even-numbered-tarball? file) - (let-values (((name version) (gnu-package-name->name+version file))) - (and version - (even-minor-version? version)))) + (define (even-numbered? file) + (let-values (((name version) (package-name->name+version file))) + (even-minor-version? (or version name)))) (false-if-ftp-error (latest-ftp-release package @@ -501,7 +500,7 @@ elpa.gnu.org, and all the GNOME packages." ;; explains ;; that odd minor version numbers represent development ;; releases, which we are usually not interested in. - #:keep-file? even-numbered-tarball? + #:keep-file? even-numbered? ;; ftp.gnome.org provides no signatures, only ;; checksums. --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> > Also, if we don't want to use those releases, we should check if the >> > other packages also use the odd (version minor-version) numbers as a >> > symbol for beta/rc releases.=20=20 >>=20 >> This is checked for GNU packages already, and I assume there=E2=80=99s n= o notion >> of =E2=80=9Cunstable=E2=80=9D releases on repos such as PyPI and CRAN? > > Could this also be a problem for GNU packages? If we didn't update to the > latest release before they put out a new development version? There could be exception, but in general, GNU packages put development releases on alpha.gnu.org, so we shouldn=E2=80=99t have this problem. Thanks! Ludo=E2=80=99. --=-=-=--