From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60759)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dXTXi-00058r-EZ
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:32:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dXTXe-0008IV-DK
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:32:06 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:44033)
	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 1dXTXe-0008IP-9O
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:32:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dXTXe-0005jZ-4R
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:32:02 -0400
Subject: [bug#27661] ISO-9660 image working and ready
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.27661.D27661.150038826721979@debbugs.gnu.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 16:30:56 +0200
From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org>
Message-ID: <20170718163056.77452560@scratchpost.org>
In-Reply-To: <87o9shyjry.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87d195etic.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20170712134405.25274-1-dannym@scratchpost.org>
	<87inixd9z1.fsf@gnu.org> <20170712192827.22b7c740@scratchpost.org>
	<87eftkjhhd.fsf@fastmail.com>
	<20170714093021.1b162844@scratchpost.org> <87bmojfp6i.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20170717212837.10c1d0b3@scratchpost.org> <87o9shyjry.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: <http://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: 27661-done@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Ludo,

On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 15:08:49 +0200 ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) wrot=
e:
>--- a/gnu/build/vm.scm
>+the result to OUTPUT.  Unless SINGLE-FILE-OUTPUT? is true, the result is
>+copied recursively to OUTPUT.

What happens when SINGLE-FILE-OUTPUT? is true? :)

I'd say something like,

If SINGLE-FILE-OUTPUT? is true, copy a single file from /xchg to OUTPUT.
Otherwise, copy the contents of /xchg to a new directory OUTPUT.

>+    (if single-file-output?
>+        (let ((graph? (lambda (name stat)
>+                        (member (basename name) references-graphs))))
>+          (copy-file (first (find-files "xchg" (negate graph?)))

Maybe raise error when there's more than one possibility?

>+derivation).  In the virtual machine, EXP has access to all its inputs fr=
om
>+the store; it should put its output files in the `/xchg' directory, which=
 is
>+copied to the derivation's output when the VM terminates, recursively, un=
less
>+SINGLE-FILE-OUTPUT? is true.=20

What if it's true?

>+++ b/guix/scripts/system.scm
[...]
>+     (system-disk-image os
>+                        #:name (match file-system-type
>+                                 ("iso9660" "image.iso")
>+                                 (_         "disk-image"))

If we called it "disk-image" in the iso9660 case as well we'd not have this=
 special case.  Do we want to?

Overall LGTM!