Re: [PATCH] Fix compiling on CentOS 7.

[Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>]

Tomáš Čech writes:

> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 12:34:44PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote:
>>On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:11:02AM +0200, Tomáš Čech wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 01:33:10AM +0200, Roel Janssen wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Florian Paul Schmidt writes:
>>> >
>>> > > On 08/27/2016 10:51 AM, Roel Janssen wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > I don't see a way to apply this patch "on the CentOS side" except for
>>> > > > waiting (another two or three years) until they upgrade Automake.
>>> > >
>>> > > When packaging guix for CentOS, just add a patch to the source package
>>> > > definition..
>>> >
>>> > I do not intend to create an RPM package for CentOS, I am merely trying
>>> > to do the following:
>>> >  git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/guix.git
>>> >  cd guix
>>> >  ./bootstrap
>>> >  ./configure
>>> >  make
>>>
>>> I see, I haven't thought about that...
>>>
>>> But, in that case, wouldn't be creating guix RPM package for CentOS even
>>> more beneficial alternative (making it easy for all CentOS7 users...)?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> S_W
>>
>>That would require keeping it up-to-date.
>
> Actually I think that this particular patch could be replaced by
> script snippet (untested) in spec:
>
>  for dir in doc emacs gnu nix; do
>    sed "s@%D%@${dir}@g" "${dir}/local.mk"
>  done
>
> Furthermore, it requires usually fix once per release - when user run
> `guix pull', it becomes irrelevant what is user running (but daemon
> changes).

But what is the point of scripting the patch procedure if we can just
prevent the need for it?  Typos that weren't there anyway?  Moving
directories around that we're not planning, and we could adjust for with
the above three lines _when the change is relevant_?  We can lower the
version requirement for Automake by this simple patch!  And doing so is
relevant to getting things to work as expected on CentOS 7.

> I must say I'm impressed by the effort to fully maintain CentOS 7 to
> 2020. If you don't want to go package way (which I think is
> prefferable) I'm not against the reverting patch anymore.

Thanks.  Mathieu, could you revert your patch, or do you want me to look
at it?

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen