* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. [not found] <20170909171635.7968-1-arunisaac@systemreboot.net> @ 2017-09-09 17:24 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <e7d9c9ca.AEQAP00oGCwAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtCPY@mailjet.com> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Arun Isaac @ 2017-09-09 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 28281 Here's an updated patch. > + (replace 'install > + (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys) > + (define (find-files-non-recursive directory) > + (find-files directory > + (lambda (file stat) > + (string-match (string-append "^" directory "/[^/]*$") > + file)) > + #:directories? #t)) Do you think it would be a good idea to add a #:recursive? keyword argument to `find-files' in (guix build utils), instead of creating this `find-files-non-recursive-function' here? > + (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out")) > + (bin (string-append out "/bin")) > + (lib (string-append out "/lib")) > + (share (string-append out "/share"))) > + (for-each (cut install-file <> bin) > + (list "linux-boot-prober" "os-prober")) > + (install-file "newns" (string-append lib "/os-prober")) > + (install-file "common.sh" (string-append share "/os-prober")) > + (install-file "os-probes/mounted/powerpc/20macosx" > + (string-append lib "/os-probes/mounted")) > + (for-each > + (lambda (directory) > + (for-each > + (lambda (file) > + (let ((destination (string-append lib "/" directory > + "/" (basename file)))) > + (mkdir-p (dirname destination)) > + (copy-recursively file destination))) > + (append (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/common")) > + (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/x86"))))) > + (list "os-probes" "os-probes/mounted" "os-probes/init" > + "linux-boot-probes" "linux-boot-probes/mounted")) > + #t)))))) I have used `find-files' instead of `ftw', as you suggested. The install procedure is clearer now. but still remains quite messy. It is not simple enough to separate the "candidate-files" and "install-file" logic. WDYT? Will the above code do? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <e7d9c9ca.AEQAP00oGCwAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtCPY@mailjet.com>]
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. [not found] ` <e7d9c9ca.AEQAP00oGCwAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtCPY@mailjet.com> @ 2017-09-10 13:05 ` Ludovic Courtès 2017-09-10 16:02 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <403302d1.ADkAAC_e-_IAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtWIT@mailjet.com> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-10 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arun Isaac; +Cc: 28281 Heya, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> skribis: > Here's an updated patch. > >> + (replace 'install >> + (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys) >> + (define (find-files-non-recursive directory) >> + (find-files directory >> + (lambda (file stat) >> + (string-match (string-append "^" directory "/[^/]*$") >> + file)) >> + #:directories? #t)) > > Do you think it would be a good idea to add a #:recursive? keyword > argument to `find-files' in (guix build utils), instead of creating this > `find-files-non-recursive-function' here? Hmm I didn’t understand that it *had* to be non-recursive. Does it really make a difference? If it does, then ‘scandir’ from (ice-9 ftw) would be the thing. Sorry if I led you in the wrong direction. :-/ >> + (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out")) >> + (bin (string-append out "/bin")) >> + (lib (string-append out "/lib")) >> + (share (string-append out "/share"))) >> + (for-each (cut install-file <> bin) >> + (list "linux-boot-prober" "os-prober")) >> + (install-file "newns" (string-append lib "/os-prober")) >> + (install-file "common.sh" (string-append share "/os-prober")) >> + (install-file "os-probes/mounted/powerpc/20macosx" >> + (string-append lib "/os-probes/mounted")) >> + (for-each >> + (lambda (directory) >> + (for-each >> + (lambda (file) >> + (let ((destination (string-append lib "/" directory >> + "/" (basename file)))) >> + (mkdir-p (dirname destination)) >> + (copy-recursively file destination))) >> + (append (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/common")) >> + (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/x86"))))) >> + (list "os-probes" "os-probes/mounted" "os-probes/init" >> + "linux-boot-probes" "linux-boot-probes/mounted")) >> + #t)))))) > > I have used `find-files' instead of `ftw', as you suggested. The install > procedure is clearer now. but still remains quite messy. It is not > simple enough to separate the "candidate-files" and "install-file" > logic. > > WDYT? Will the above code do? Sure. I mean, we should try our best to make things clearer, while not losing our hairs on it. Sometimes it just has to be messy. Thanks, Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. 2017-09-10 13:05 ` Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-10 16:02 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <403302d1.ADkAAC_e-_IAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtWIT@mailjet.com> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Arun Isaac @ 2017-09-10 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: 28281 >>> + (replace 'install >>> + (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys) >>> + (define (find-files-non-recursive directory) >>> + (find-files directory >>> + (lambda (file stat) >>> + (string-match (string-append "^" directory "/[^/]*$") >>> + file)) >>> + #:directories? #t)) >> >> Do you think it would be a good idea to add a #:recursive? keyword >> argument to `find-files' in (guix build utils), instead of creating this >> `find-files-non-recursive-function' here? > > Hmm I didn’t understand that it *had* to be non-recursive. Does it > really make a difference? I am trying to do cp -r /some/directory/* destination To do this, I used `find-files-non-recursive' to get all files in /some/directory/ and applied `copy-recursively' on each one of them. Do you have a better way of doing this in mind? > If it does, then ‘scandir’ from (ice-9 ftw) would be the thing. Sorry > if I led you in the wrong direction. :-/ Yes, scandir could be used. But, it also returns "." and "..", and I'll have to filter them out. So code length, or clarity-wise, it won't be much of an improvement. That is why I thought adding a #:recursive? argument to `find-files' would be nice. >>> + (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out")) >>> + (bin (string-append out "/bin")) >>> + (lib (string-append out "/lib")) >>> + (share (string-append out "/share"))) >>> + (for-each (cut install-file <> bin) >>> + (list "linux-boot-prober" "os-prober")) >>> + (install-file "newns" (string-append lib "/os-prober")) >>> + (install-file "common.sh" (string-append share "/os-prober")) >>> + (install-file "os-probes/mounted/powerpc/20macosx" >>> + (string-append lib "/os-probes/mounted")) >>> + (for-each >>> + (lambda (directory) >>> + (for-each >>> + (lambda (file) >>> + (let ((destination (string-append lib "/" directory >>> + "/" (basename file)))) >>> + (mkdir-p (dirname destination)) >>> + (copy-recursively file destination))) >>> + (append (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/common")) >>> + (find-files-non-recursive (string-append directory "/x86"))))) >>> + (list "os-probes" "os-probes/mounted" "os-probes/init" >>> + "linux-boot-probes" "linux-boot-probes/mounted")) >>> + #t)))))) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <403302d1.ADkAAC_e-_IAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtWIT@mailjet.com>]
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. [not found] ` <403302d1.ADkAAC_e-_IAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtWIT@mailjet.com> @ 2017-09-10 20:41 ` Ludovic Courtès 2017-09-10 23:35 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <5dc91a20.AEAAPzHdNuYAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtcxv@mailjet.com> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-10 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arun Isaac; +Cc: 28281 Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> skribis: >>>> + (replace 'install >>>> + (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys) >>>> + (define (find-files-non-recursive directory) >>>> + (find-files directory >>>> + (lambda (file stat) >>>> + (string-match (string-append "^" directory "/[^/]*$") >>>> + file)) >>>> + #:directories? #t)) >>> >>> Do you think it would be a good idea to add a #:recursive? keyword >>> argument to `find-files' in (guix build utils), instead of creating this >>> `find-files-non-recursive-function' here? >> >> Hmm I didn’t understand that it *had* to be non-recursive. Does it >> really make a difference? > > I am trying to do > > cp -r /some/directory/* destination > > To do this, I used `find-files-non-recursive' to get all files in > /some/directory/ and applied `copy-recursively' on each one of them. > > Do you have a better way of doing this in mind? Would (copy-recursively "/some/directory" destination) work for you? >> If it does, then ‘scandir’ from (ice-9 ftw) would be the thing. Sorry >> if I led you in the wrong direction. :-/ > > Yes, scandir could be used. But, it also returns "." and "..", and I'll > have to filter them out. So code length, or clarity-wise, it won't be > much of an improvement. That is why I thought adding a #:recursive? > argument to `find-files' would be nice. Yeah, looks like none of the options is a perfect match. HTH, LUdo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. 2017-09-10 20:41 ` Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-10 23:35 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <5dc91a20.AEAAPzHdNuYAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtcxv@mailjet.com> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Arun Isaac @ 2017-09-10 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: 28281 >> I am trying to do >> >> cp -r /some/directory/* destination >> >> To do this, I used `find-files-non-recursive' to get all files in >> /some/directory/ and applied `copy-recursively' on each one of them. >> >> Do you have a better way of doing this in mind? > > Would (copy-recursively "/some/directory" destination) work for you? No, it wouldn't. That would recreate /some/directory at the destination. I only want the files inside /some/directory to be copied, not /some/directory itself. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5dc91a20.AEAAPzHdNuYAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtcxv@mailjet.com>]
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. [not found] ` <5dc91a20.AEAAPzHdNuYAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtcxv@mailjet.com> @ 2017-09-11 7:28 ` Ludovic Courtès 2017-09-11 17:23 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <207deec4.AEAAP2Xyu24AAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtsaB@mailjet.com> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-11 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arun Isaac; +Cc: 28281 Hi Arun, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> skribis: >>> I am trying to do >>> >>> cp -r /some/directory/* destination >>> >>> To do this, I used `find-files-non-recursive' to get all files in >>> /some/directory/ and applied `copy-recursively' on each one of them. >>> >>> Do you have a better way of doing this in mind? >> >> Would (copy-recursively "/some/directory" destination) work for you? > > No, it wouldn't. That would recreate /some/directory at the > destination. I only want the files inside /some/directory to be copied, > not /some/directory itself. Ah sorry. Then yeah, either ‘scandir’ or ‘find-files’, whichever you find is the least cumbersome. Feel free to push something along these lines! Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. 2017-09-11 7:28 ` Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-11 17:23 ` Arun Isaac [not found] ` <207deec4.AEAAP2Xyu24AAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtsaB@mailjet.com> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Arun Isaac @ 2017-09-11 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: 28281 >>> Would (copy-recursively "/some/directory" destination) work for you? >> >> No, it wouldn't. That would recreate /some/directory at the >> destination. I only want the files inside /some/directory to be copied, >> not /some/directory itself. > > Ah sorry. Then yeah, either ‘scandir’ or ‘find-files’, whichever you > find is the least cumbersome. > > Feel free to push something along these lines! Not sure I follow you. Should I 1. push the patch I sent most recently OR 2. or add a #:recursive? argument to `find-files', and push a patch which uses this new `find-files'? IMO, approach 2 is a better idea, though it could be that we are adding too many keyword arguments to `find-files'. WDYT? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <207deec4.AEAAP2Xyu24AAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtsaB@mailjet.com>]
* [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. [not found] ` <207deec4.AEAAP2Xyu24AAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtsaB@mailjet.com> @ 2017-09-11 20:20 ` Ludovic Courtès 2017-09-13 23:22 ` bug#28281: " Arun Isaac 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-11 20:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arun Isaac; +Cc: 28281 Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> skribis: >>>> Would (copy-recursively "/some/directory" destination) work for you? >>> >>> No, it wouldn't. That would recreate /some/directory at the >>> destination. I only want the files inside /some/directory to be copied, >>> not /some/directory itself. >> >> Ah sorry. Then yeah, either ‘scandir’ or ‘find-files’, whichever you >> find is the least cumbersome. >> >> Feel free to push something along these lines! > > Not sure I follow you. Should I > > 1. push the patch I sent most recently > > OR > > 2. or add a #:recursive? argument to `find-files', and push a patch > which uses this new `find-files'? > > IMO, approach 2 is a better idea, though it could be that we are adding > too many keyword arguments to `find-files'. > > WDYT? I’m for approach #1, go for it! :-) Approach #2 would take a full rebuild, and it would make ‘find-files’ equivalent to ‘scandir’, so not worth it IMO. Sorry for being unclear! Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#28281: [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober. 2017-09-11 20:20 ` Ludovic Courtès @ 2017-09-13 23:22 ` Arun Isaac 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Arun Isaac @ 2017-09-13 23:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 28281-done >> Should I >> >> 1. push the patch I sent most recently >> >> OR >> >> 2. or add a #:recursive? argument to `find-files', and push a patch >> which uses this new `find-files'? >> >> IMO, approach 2 is a better idea, though it could be that we are adding >> too many keyword arguments to `find-files'. >> >> WDYT? > > I’m for approach #1, go for it! :-) Ok, pushed! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-13 23:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20170909171635.7968-1-arunisaac@systemreboot.net>
2017-09-09 17:24 ` [bug#28281] [PATCH] gnu: Add os-prober Arun Isaac
[not found] ` <e7d9c9ca.AEQAP00oGCwAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtCPY@mailjet.com>
2017-09-10 13:05 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-10 16:02 ` Arun Isaac
[not found] ` <403302d1.ADkAAC_e-_IAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtWIT@mailjet.com>
2017-09-10 20:41 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-10 23:35 ` Arun Isaac
[not found] ` <5dc91a20.AEAAPzHdNuYAAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtcxv@mailjet.com>
2017-09-11 7:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-11 17:23 ` Arun Isaac
[not found] ` <207deec4.AEAAP2Xyu24AAAAAAAAAAAOzWv8AAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZtsaB@mailjet.com>
2017-09-11 20:20 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-09-13 23:22 ` bug#28281: " Arun Isaac
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).