From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43332)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j6dIV-0003bu-Eh
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:43:04 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j6dIU-00061Z-5W
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:43:03 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50089)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1j6dIU-00061V-2h
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:43:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j6dIU-0006ON-0o
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:43:02 -0500
Subject: [bug#39588] gnu: Add mpich, scalapack-mpich, mumps-mpich,
 pt-scotch-mpich, python-mpi4py-mpich
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.39588.B39588.158264893524513@debbugs.gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <87blq2rclk.fsf@inria.fr> <87o8tx3z2q.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAJ3okZ0szPexSebyY4Td+M9Lb06WGHD__Qh+A3qOvL-Ei2efnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <87eeupd3t1.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAJ3okZ1DnP9ZZE2Ovxj_87Akazxw+743ahwTNDN24aBThGB+jg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ3okZ1DnP9ZZE2Ovxj_87Akazxw+743ahwTNDN24aBThGB+jg@mail.gmail.com>
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 17:41:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ0Zug88h4V_yzkHEVkWLKwew8rG3RGg79=_p4AHm3_rpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: Maurice =?UTF-8?Q?Br=C3=A9mond?= <Maurice.Bremond@inria.fr>, 39588@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Ludo,

On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 11:23, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 10:08, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> > > One easy move should to generalize -- if possible -- what is done in
> > > 'with-python2' or 'with-ocaml4.07'. But I am not convinced it is easy
> > > because it is clearly dependant on the build system.
>
> > > Well, for these particular patches, the variants are ok.
> > > But we should think about how to ease the variant generation of all t=
he chain.
> >
> > Well again there are things like =E2=80=98package-input-rewriting=E2=80=
=99 that could
> > help: we could define a =E2=80=98package-with-mpich=E2=80=99 procedure.
>
> Yes. 'with-python2' and 'with-ocaml4.07' rewrite the build-system
> (implicit inputs) and 'package-with-mpich' rewrites packages
> ('package-input-rewritting' so explicit ones) more tweak some
> variables (environment and/or flags).
> Sounds good. :-)

I do not know why I remove the "package-" in "package-with-python2".
Whatever! :-)
My remark was to maybe distinguish between rewriting an input and
rewriting the build-system. But after some thoughts, I do not know if
it is useful and add more complexity.

However, I do not know if the good candidate is
'package-input-rewriting' or 'package-mapping'; as in
'package-with-python2'. Well, I will try to experiment in the
meantime.


All the best,
simon