[bug#40350] [PATCH] ui: Mention that changes to package definitions can cause "upgrades".

[bug#40350] [PATCH] ui: Mention that changes to package definitions can cause "upgrades".

[Leo Famulari]

* guix/ui.scm (show-manifest-transaction)[upgrade-string]: Use the
package name in UI message.
---
 guix/ui.scm | 9 ++++++---
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/guix/ui.scm b/guix/ui.scm
index 1e24fe5dca..20b1e79ca9 100644
--- a/guix/ui.scm
+++ b/guix/ui.scm
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 ;;; Copyright © 2019 Chris Marusich <cmmarusich@gmail.com>
 ;;; Copyright © 2019 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
 ;;; Copyright © 2019 Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
+;;; Copyright © 2020 Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
 ;;;
 ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
 ;;;
@@ -1162,11 +1163,13 @@ separator between subsequent columns."
                               name
                               (string-append name ":" output)))
                         names outputs)
-                   (map (lambda (old new)
+                   (map (lambda (old new name)
                           (if (string=? old new)
-                              (G_ "(dependencies changed)")
+                              (format
+                                (G_ "(dependencies or ~a package recipe changed)")
+                                name)
                               (string-append old " " → " " new)))
-                        old-version new-version))
+                        old-version new-version names))
               #:initial-indent 3))
 
   (let-values (((remove install upgrade downgrade)
-- 
2.26.0

[bug#40350] [PATCH] ui: Mention that changes to package definitions can cause "upgrades".

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> * guix/ui.scm (show-manifest-transaction)[upgrade-string]: Use the
> package name in UI message.

[...]

>                            (if (string=? old new)
> -                              (G_ "(dependencies changed)")
> +                              (format
> +                                (G_ "(dependencies or ~a package recipe changed)")

Is that not implied in a way?

If it is, how about something shorter like:

  (dependencies or package changed)

?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

[bug#40350] [PATCH] ui: Mention that changes to package definitions can cause "upgrades".

[Leo Famulari]

On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 11:03:22PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Is that not implied in a way?

It is, but I think we will still get some confused users asking about
it.

> If it is, how about something shorter like:
> 
>   (dependencies or package changed)

Yeah, I think that's okay.

bug#40350: [PATCH] ui: Mention that changes to package definitions can cause "upgrades".

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 11:03:22PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Is that not implied in a way?
>
> It is, but I think we will still get some confused users asking about
> it.
>
>> If it is, how about something shorter like:
>> 
>>   (dependencies or package changed)
>
> Yeah, I think that's okay.

OK, done!

Thanks,
Ludo’.