From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:c151::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id pdNhBRcqV2BtcwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:12:23 +0000 Received: from aspmx2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:c151::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id UJiZABcqV2AbRAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:12:23 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx2.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19C5511040 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:12:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36458 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNw0K-00018D-4N for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:12:20 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58388) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNw02-000185-Qa for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:12:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42095) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNw02-0004Th-JX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:12:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNw02-0003v4-Fi for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:12:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#47027] Disarchive package Resent-From: Leo Prikler Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:12:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47027 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Timothy Sample Cc: 47027@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 47027-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47027.161632506614999 (code B ref 47027); Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:12:02 +0000 Received: (at 47027) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Mar 2021 11:11:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53641 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvz7-0003tr-QL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:11:06 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:63639) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvz4-0003tP-11 for 47027@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:11:04 -0400 Received: from nijino.local (194-96-13-79.adsl.highway.telekom.at [194.96.13.79]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F3FLB5ktdz3xkK; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:10:58 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1616325059; bh=o1Mb/QT1rB/YzfvYnD62WAQI1V2rCVWKVaGqHV4OanQ=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=ITXU9+1vGn+EXHL32fWdHPfjnBFwx6QrFW8nPWb7ZgbmcE6hIQ/faTzg31LuEy3+y frySgGyBbqI9QFIWsyHAfclFlFxLPyiSL8bSleBzO32ryAl1Id2tVGCnQnqlF5nh2k KUbwwNXy5XNSBlo2/cqH92z0VrZhQUdBaDFPhaFE= Message-ID: <41e844576ada1fd6a5a599521b23e046a672c4c9.camel@student.tugraz.at> From: Leo Prikler Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:10:57 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87y2eg3imr.fsf_-_@gnu.org> References: <20210309193925.15447-1-samplet@ngyro.com> <20210309193925.15447-2-samplet@ngyro.com> <6c09a18a2f23bc093eecaae17fc9b007847ef14b.camel@student.tugraz.at> <87eeglwd1n.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87im5xyssi.fsf@ngyro.com> <875z1ws4mc.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2eg3imr.fsf_-_@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: bt4lQm5Tva3SBgCuw0EnZw X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.116 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1616325142; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=o1Mb/QT1rB/YzfvYnD62WAQI1V2rCVWKVaGqHV4OanQ=; b=jDykNFuQfxmazd0sD86MGtH6nznxPBawsoj8qfOTKkSm3+bEtrGEP4kH0YyNQalmFLDXy9 B5dlLQb7dHx5fSDZwNEeX0nalaIlfnektbCfVKvoGuaLu+c44eGkFpjywGCebptu13ENlg l01jdguCm5HEM9RJxE2Zg4qJzPOx64NmUYsEhPG01/E050DJ/7eDZdYucKm8MVFJeHB51Y I7EraPFekDljAdJ3fAGkLQ4FtWXC+fBTd5qbxvBQ8zOcbS7mBpgnYE77FrIUylAQNLEDLZ XYtEa9+JtmqDJji1jaszIa7wNUa83ijB3b42Ojl9Tfww8xBBVNL+hENE/6OJNQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1616325142; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=TtnHrvn5yMMHIB8L+tuAdisiSc99ACHczTmEQwxdtOpJX1+CKl1Mn6tyfTJ87H/zZ/WNA+ XjLFYQadIggNJYlmKHxKiqyu8RKeth/0FyQ50F/uHwS7VAlI67JH9ZKLvAlRL6VjJiiEoW 12wRvsZzCd4Z63m0Czcq1ekYEW7cObAqtUS2QDXW43dv3Or+ikJvsfy2iUjF+HYU5Z5SVJ 3SgU3526eJ2e9v3HHcrARiG+0P+SczsNjk9OZ6R+2uuuqHH2A5HPwQZs0iBKwXr/shCrFp WlRGDYifPWQZBbyppqnjIfckKQtJ+4XrcUx5c5POJq+WMGHeYc5rZXxRSrhWiA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx2.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b=ITXU9+1v; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=student.tugraz.at (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx2.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.32 Authentication-Results: aspmx2.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b=ITXU9+1v; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=student.tugraz.at (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx2.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 19C5511040 X-Spam-Score: -1.32 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: /onChEB2b4tS Am Sonntag, den 21.03.2021, 11:29 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > Ping! :-) I've pushed guile-quickcheck as 4cd88522f233dcb9affa3d3b0eada154439487c1, so we now only need to discuss what to do with (guile-)?disarchive. > > Hello! > > > > Timothy Sample skribis: > > > > > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > > > > > Leo Prikler skribis: > > > > > > > > > I've checked and the package seems to build fine with Guile > > > > > 3.0.2. I > > > > > think the bytecode mismatch happens, because Guix compiles > > > > > stuff with > > > > > 3.0.2 by default, but users have 3.0.5 in their system, which > > > > > is not > > > > > bytecode-compatible. (As an exception, Guix itself seems to > > > > > be > > > > > compiled with Guile 3.0.5 for performance reasons). > > > > > > > > > > I think it would be fine to add with Guile 3.0.2, perhaps > > > > > adding a note > > > > > that Guile 3.0.5 will effectively be required to use Guix > > > > > interop? If > > > > > not, could you provide a script, that breaks in a way other > > > > > than > > > > > recompiling the mismatching code? > > > > > > > > I tend to agree here: I don’t think ‘guile-3.0-latest’ is > > > > needed in this > > > > case. The only case where you need it is if it depends on a > > > > library, > > > > such as Guix, that is itself built with ‘guile-3.0-latest’. > > > > > > Well, now I’m second guessing myself. :) > > > > > > It is just the auto compilation notes and warnings that I’m > > > worried > > > about. The module closure of “swh.scm” works fine on Guile > > > 3.0.2. > > > > > > Eventually, the daemon will invoke Disarchive via > > > “builtin:download” and > > > “perform-download.scm”. I intend to use the Scheme interface > > > there, > > > which means Disarchive will be runing on Guile 3.0.5. For that, > > > it > > > would be preferable to have a Guile 3.0.5 version of Disarchive, > > > right? > > > > No, that’s fine. Guile 3.0.5 can run 3.0.2 bytecode without any > > warnings; what yields warnings is doing it the other way around. > > Anyway, we can always revisit this if problems come up. > > > > > On the other hand, when using Disarchive to extract metadata > > > (e.g., with > > > Cuirass), the SWH code is not needed at all. > > > > > > I will resurrect my patch for calling Disarchive from Guix, and > > > come > > > back to this when I know exactly what kind of package I need for > > > that to > > > work smoothly. > > > > Yay! > > > > > > > As far as the location is concerned, I personally do not like > > > > > adding > > > > > too many single-package files. Would it make sense to add > > > > > this to > > > > > compression.scm (like gzip) or backup.scm (like libarchive)? > > > > > > > > Maybe there’ll be other packages eventually in archival.scm, > > > > like the > > > > SWH Python code? It’s fine with me, but I don’t have a strong > > > > opinion. > > > > > > I don’t feel strongly about it either. There’s other software > > > besides > > > Disarchive and SWH that could be called “archival”, and I think > > > it’s > > > more accurate than the other options. > > > > Dunno maybe you can do as Leo suggests by putting it in guile- > > xyz.scm or > > some such. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Ludo’.