From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Bavier Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add stress-make. Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 17:47:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20160809174728.44fd5921@openmailbox.org> References: <9afd224fbac5196b7606f4539231ccdd@openmailbox.org> <20160807015916.GB5374@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49411) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXFoT-000249-DS for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 18:47:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXFoO-0001Lb-Kw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 18:47:56 -0400 Received: from mail2.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.33]:48969) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXFoO-0001LM-BM for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 18:47:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160807015916.GB5374@jasmine> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Leo Famulari Cc: Guix-devel On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 21:59:16 -0400 Leo Famulari wrote: > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:53:33AM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote: > > Hello Guix, > > > > I'm mostly looking for a second-opinion on the license of this package. > > Other comments welcome too, of course. > > > > * gnu/packages/debug.scm (stress-make): New variable. > > > + (version (string-append "1.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7))) > > It appears they never made a release, so I think we should use "0.0.0" > instead of "1.0". I used "1.0" because that's the version number in configure.ac. > > > + (uri (git-reference > > + (url "git://github.com/losalamos/stress-make.git") > > I think it's better to use the HTTPS protocol instead of the Git > protocol, unless there is some reason not to. What do you think? > > https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-The-Protocols#The-Git-Protocol OK, sounds good. > > > + (inputs > > + `(("make-src" ,(package-source gnu-make)))) > > How about "make-source", since we seem to shun abbreviations? Right. > > > + (arguments > > + ;; stress-make's configure script insists on having a tarball and does > > + ;; not accept a directory name instead. To let the gnu-build-system's > > + ;; patch-* phases work properly, we unpack the source first, then > > + ;; repack before the configure phase. > > o_O Yeah, it's a bit weird. > > > + ;; stress-make wrapper is under BSD-3-modifications-must-be-indicated, > > + ;; and patched GNU Make is under its own license. > > + (license (list bsd-3 (package-license gnu-make)))))) > > Perhaps we should call it non-copyleft instead of bsd-3? That seems more appropriate, yes. Thanks for the review, `~Eric