From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id aN/4NzIgV2CyfgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:30:10 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id uBHBMzIgV2BfNwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:30:10 +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 9532C1918A for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:30:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48184 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvLV-0000Rp-CP for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:30:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51680) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvLO-0000Ri-Gl for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:30:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42051) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvLO-0006f6-93 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:30:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvLO-0002pU-4e for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:30:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#47027] Disarchive package Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:30:02 +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: Timothy Sample Cc: Leo Prikler , 47027@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 47027-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47027.161632255610795 (code B ref 47027); Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:30:02 +0000 Received: (at 47027) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Mar 2021 10:29:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53597 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvKd-0002o3-L7 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:29:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58588) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvKY-0002nm-KI for 47027@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:29:14 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37797) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvKR-00063a-Dy; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:29:03 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=35412 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lNvKQ-00067b-16; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 06:29:02 -0400 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= 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> Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:29:00 +0100 In-Reply-To: <875z1ws4mc.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Fri, 12 Mar 2021 17:45:15 +0100") Message-ID: <87y2eg3imr.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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=1616322610; 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; bh=fqGOtLFz/G+dy0FBjjfAHNcF2G7R/bub7wEB+hLICMQ=; b=Md4dN5aqyI2tmx/vV5XW97cm9iAwW36caiF035tkTWRaIxaLsbCby5rA2DFd28H4V2OUhe HssTy354lClBRUi7IjIgDp68mnKXlQ/z2q5HPguP57IPqcDH3EHHcu/uqEehgF4QVwEUse lpFOJEebRUZcBryHTVXoYZ8m4FGyZIZm+vrWPu163oIdnbJogrNZPJZsqJn95YEeH8Hn8D btwIEXA4/rYOPexlOyxDWKEWIzybGdTXD4pdgVm8giv9inkAYXQKiqiueOcVs8pOpldgXZ KcWuIwcxJwZat5zOut482h/muXX6fbhWeIjvfpvLrPDEi+c/TdJOE0BhPfIvhg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1616322610; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=dPmcMQaeEB5y0cF2zofasQKl8GUqx+GX1seD+mtYtuy5B+wdW6GLcEvlAlTjiJ4o13GJY3 NnJUQ+TcW199frP06thC8/HLjmhgmcLURIQcReZIEuaqh6d1Mq+Xe2/Q/ulB55JofyW+kM 7/MjqjzcThJJlAUroMGOl0fZwjiexZkgj05LqOxu1LfYD5DBTZ7zgV6JFtq3xcwfnJhWzO FEfX1dOY7DqE7PM/B3A3gODtlh+or0a/dd5M8FUKBroaOKbaKC3tSQEXZjQEDRbPYKwA2J TrTqvdlZgGtrMXnIpT/aG12c3iEfrS8YM/0qapLp6zQUbuPaqg4cJ4aVF/TRGw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=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-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.92 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; 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-Migadu-Queue-Id: 9532C1918A X-Spam-Score: -2.92 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: jevEsjrBKLFM Ping! :-) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s skribis: > Hello! > > Timothy Sample skribis: > >> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s 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=E2=80=99t think =E2=80=98guile-3.0-latest= =E2=80=99 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 =E2=80=98guile-3.0-latest=E2=80= =99. >> >> Well, now I=E2=80=99m second guessing myself. :) >> >> It is just the auto compilation notes and warnings that I=E2=80=99m worr= ied >> about. The module closure of =E2=80=9Cswh.scm=E2=80=9D works fine on Gu= ile 3.0.2. >> >> Eventually, the daemon will invoke Disarchive via =E2=80=9Cbuiltin:downl= oad=E2=80=9D and >> =E2=80=9Cperform-download.scm=E2=80=9D. I intend to use the Scheme inte= rface 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=E2=80=99s 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=E2=80=99ll be other packages eventually in archival.scm, li= ke the >>> SWH Python code? It=E2=80=99s fine with me, but I don=E2=80=99t have a= strong opinion. >> >> I don=E2=80=99t feel strongly about it either. There=E2=80=99s other so= ftware besides >> Disarchive and SWH that could be called =E2=80=9Carchival=E2=80=9D, and = I think it=E2=80=99s >> 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=E2=80=99.