Kei Kebreau writes: > Alex Vong writes: > >> Kei Kebreau writes: >> >>> Alex Vong writes: >>> >>>> 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? >>> >>> Maybe this is true when manipulating the package definition, but that >>> doesn't seem to be the case in general. When I run >>> "./pre-inst-env guix package --show=shogun", for example, >>> "octave-cli@4.4.1" is listed as a dependency, even though "octave" is >>> the associated name in shogun's input list. >>> >>> To be clear, I've changed the string for octave's and octave-cli's >>> package name in their respective package definitions, but I haven't >>> changed the string in the input lists of octave-cli's dependent >>> packages. >>> >>> I'm inclined to follow convention when it comes to this, and other >>> packages in input lists seem to omit extensions to the base name of the >>> package in their assoc-lists. For example, ("gettext", gettext-minimal) >>> and ("python", python-minimal-wrapper) are common inputs for packages. >> >> I think you are right! This was a misunderstanding on my part. I thought >> the association string in the input lists must be the same as the >> package name, but appraently this is not the case. >> >> Take gettext-minimal as an example, >> its variable name is 'gettext-minimal', >> its package name is "gettext-minimal", >> but its input name is "gettext". > > Precisely! Unless anyone else has concerns that should be brought to > light, I'll be committing this within the next 2 days. > > Thank you to all involved so far. I've pushed this to master. Thanks again!