[bug#62050] [PATCH] gnu: Add tissue.

["Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>]

Howdy!

Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> skribis:

>> Note that Disarchive does not support lzip (yet).
>>
>> Thus it’s be a bit more archival-friendly if you would instead either
>> refer to a gzip tarball or refer to the Git repo.  It’s not a blocker
>> though.
>
> I really like lzip due to its supposedly better
> design. https://www.nongnu.org/lzip/safety_of_the_lzip_format.html I've
> been speaking to Timothy Sample about supporting lzip in
> disarchive. It's a non-trivial amount of work, but I'll try to get it
> done.

Yeah, I imagine it’s not trivial.

>>> +     (list #:make-flags #~(list (string-append "prefix=" #$output))
>>> +           #:modules `(((guix build guile-build-system)
>>> +                        #:select (target-guile-effective-version))
>>> +                       ,@%gnu-build-system-modules)
>>
>> You can change the last line to just (guix build gnu-build-system).
>
> Replacing %gnu-build-system-modules with (guix build gnu-build-system)
> does not work since we also need (guix build utils). I could replace
> %gnu-build-system-modules with (guix build gnu-build-system) and (guix
> build utils), but is there something wrong with using
> %gnu-build-system-modules?

‘%gnu-build-system-modules’ is documented as the set of “modules
imported and used by default”, whereas here you just want to specify
modules in scope.  So I would have a slight preference for an explicit
list here.  It’s really cosmetic though, no big deal.

>> Next step is a system service I guess?  :-)
>
> Yep! I have a service in the guix-forge channel, but it uses a few
> guix-forge specific constructs. I'll try and adapt it.

Neat!

Ludo’.