From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iIJHOgSurl/6NgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:02:12 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id OOEFNgSurl9WXAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:02:12 +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 aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98AF59401BD for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48246 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbWd-00021O-IC for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:02:11 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38922) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbWU-0001zW-Ep for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:02:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37621) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbWU-0002bi-3v for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:02:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbWU-000579-2H for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:02:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#44613] what =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9Cguix?= build =?UTF-8?Q?-S=E2=80=9D?= should return? Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44613 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Marius Bakke , Roel Janssen , 44613@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 44613-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44613.160528329119616 (code B ref 44613); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:02:02 +0000 Received: (at 44613) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Nov 2020 16:01:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49165 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbVy-00056K-JG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:01:30 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f53.google.com ([209.85.128.53]:53506) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdbVw-000560-91 for 44613@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:01:28 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f53.google.com with SMTP id p22so8540459wmg.3 for <44613@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:01:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=2BCsQuEQKqsJxDSTf1/r2YdgBUtvi+Ng+NnQ7si9uYY=; b=PVRXjc0XgP1TBO17iEg7v/GK7yheZ7gaCz3DQQZVSxrHgeB5zE5TguPRh9zQjLNSB3 XzpVh2FEt6gQd83Eg05sDERO1JYlxRO5HiQKmj2s/ln/w4KQyoPDvhgeevTzlR9cEsa2 flR0KTAVUg8SvdvIyQh+WKydaf0bXaZTz4eTS/XN1+ZMIvyFzg5wft8ltTzWR0YnF5Kn PE6Td/Zpz6sfYLetgTazYccw/wEwaTCrS2k1RxlXKb9KmzgAwZhGCWNcAQ6iB5/I7W3p R07v8SvUzAI2bECKMTVDTQEyOc5Mh/1PhJeTGvY2nJUiDQv9/efWiwVtHDPWSvAoTCIO 70Gg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2BCsQuEQKqsJxDSTf1/r2YdgBUtvi+Ng+NnQ7si9uYY=; b=Iur8uZakAyBy4bmxCc7dpFtsz9qWJuaZC33LfKuvCXu4I8/I05pMccJqBLHiPOPrlx IciPqKzdud89UgDzVHaFL7rNuYI9M7VOcW/TIzMdKWtFBCJI2pcTMql/d3+Ea+NmsQJ8 d1SeOoJrToVsPOc6aoIii9yXfXLTcMdjxUj9FJZWfmnk7kD8CH6GCynsizQDAS+XryuB Ljz9F/LBYUhVvz10FS1Lw++GVBIu8wPZhFbHTjQJ+rNH9djIKSF+gJZlya9QL5FUYjh/ VRw85IBan5rgis0S134UR1ZxOVnlbtHNkQ/Uo2JCcaBdhG/5dP/tdUYb9t0A6H04hpga DAdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532P0Befub8BDtIsuOqhgDKMT7XaD3ZIZUv7ZdLfxldWnfU2STEa 6fpTATnv4CbSvF6OxKznvLB+Jg+xAZzaMg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzump4/Z5eOCChiKWa66IXiQnxvEJ/r8hS78TjMvh/cr5w0TrTp0Vigb0olBWzGUxTefsGjlQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:4646:: with SMTP id t67mr3366969wma.40.1605283276456; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:01:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b8sm12216193wrv.57.2020.11.13.08.01.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:01:15 -0800 (PST) From: zimoun In-Reply-To: <87o8k1b8gk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86v9e9e8gz.fsf@gmail.com> <695715d9f08a7ec06b6dfe8bcf71173829a0d029.camel@gnu.org> <86k0upe5yp.fsf@gmail.com> <87o8k1b8gk.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:51:46 +0100 Message-ID: <86eekxdzl9.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) 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-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (headers rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=PVRXjc0X; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.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-Spam-Score: 1.09 X-TUID: neRFu59Bo0wR Hi Marius, Thank you for the explanations. On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 16:08, Marius Bakke wrote: > zimoun writes: > >> PS: >> I am always confused if the removal should be done in =E2=80=99origin=E2= =80=99 or in the >> =E2=80=99add-after 'unpack=E2=80=99 phase; especially when the bundle is= free software. >> Other said, what should an user expect when fetching with =E2=80=9Cguix = build -S=E2=80=9D? >> Anyway! :-) > > Unbundling is always better to do in a snippet. It leads to less > bandwidth usage, and users can more easily inspect the (actual) code. Well, I do not know. For example, I could do this workflow: guix environment bedtools tar -xvf $(guix build -S bedtools) make which probably fails because removing the bundles often needs some extra tweaks. Concretely, see python-pysam for instance: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (snippet '(begin ;; Drop bundled htslib. TODO: Also remove samtools ;; and bcftools. (delete-file-recursively "htslib") #t)))) [...] #:phases (modify-phases %standard-phases (add-before 'build 'set-flags (lambda* (#:key inputs #:allow-other-keys) (setenv "HTSLIB_MODE" "external") (setenv "HTSLIB_LIBRARY_DIR" (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "htslib") "/lib")) (setenv "HTSLIB_INCLUDE_DIR" (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "htslib") "/include")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Then, I am not convince that: guix build bedtools --with-git-url=3Dhttp://example.org works too. Or =E2=80=99--with-source=3D=E2=80=99 as well. I remember a di= scussion initiated by Mark and Maxim about this: snippet vs phases but I am not able to reach it. > For other kinds of patching the boundary is less clear. Generally, > Guix-specific tweaks should be in a phase, but "universal" bug fixes may > well be in a snippet. I agree that non-free and bug fixes should go to snippet. Then I am still confused and my feelings are mixed about Guix specific tweaks. > I sometimes imagine a downstream distribution that use Guix sources, but > not the build scripts, to draw the line. It seems a good criteria to draw the line. And in the case of bedtools or python-pysam or many others, =E2=80=99snippet=E2=80=99 removes (free sof= tware) bundles because of an implicit and non-uniform Guix policy that a downstream distribution could choose differently. Well, my mind is not clear about this topic. :-) All the best, simon