[bug#70158] [PATCH 0/6] Scilab: Fixup install of local Scilab packages.

[bug#70158] [PATCH 0/6] Scilab: Fixup install of local Scilab packages.

[Nicolas Graves via Guix-patches via]

This patch series brings a few changes forward for Scilab.
Patches 1,2 and 4 are cleanup patches.
Patches 3 and 5 are necessary to be able to have an error log when
Scilab calls configure during installation of external scilab
packages.
Patch 6 fixes package installation for packages that have help
included (currently requires java).

Nicolas Graves (6):
  gnu: scilab: Remove unecessary code.
  gnu: scilab: Sort dynamic_link deleted files.
  gnu: scilab: Fixup badly-written compilerDetection.sh script.
  gnu: scilab: Simpler and more robust version setting.
  gnu: scilab: Improve compilerDetection.sh.
  gnu: scilab: Improve package management robustness in scilab-cli.

 gnu/packages/maths.scm                        | 20 +++++------
 .../scilab-better-compiler-detection.patch    | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../patches/scilab-tbx_build_help.patch       | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/scilab-better-compiler-detection.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/scilab-tbx_build_help.patch

-- 
2.41.0

[bug#70158] [PATCH 0/6] Scilab: Fixup install of local Scilab packages.

[Nicolas Graves via Guix-patches via]

On 2024-04-08 22:31, David Elsing wrote:

> Hi Nicolas,
>
> I'm not really familiar with Scilab itself, I worked on the package to
> update the SuiteSparse dependency and noticed that many files were
> autogenerated.

Thanks for your review David.
>
> Here are some comments about your patches:
> - I think patches 1, 2 and 4 can be combined, as well as patches 3, 5
>   and 6, or was there a reason to split them?

6 is separate from 3 and 5, I'll merge the other though, thanks!

> - For patch 4, I don't think you need to mention how many lines are
>   saved in the commit message. :)

DONE

> - For patches 5 and 6, my impression was that patch files should have a
>   comment and mention the upstream status if relevant. Maybe you can
>   additionally make a merge request upstream for them, as they do not
>   seem specific to Guix? Patch files should also be registered in
>   gnu/local.mk.

I will. 

> - `guix lint` mentions that "bash-minimal" should be in 'inputs' when
>   'wrap-program' is used. This is relevant for cross builds, but at the
>   moment, dune-build-system (for OCaml packages) does not support cross
>   builds anyway. It wouldn't hurt to add bash-minimal anyway though.

Thanks, will add that too.

>
> Otherwise, they look fine to me.
>
> Cheers,
> David

-- 
Best regards,
Nicolas Graves