> I’d write it like this: > > (lambda _ > ,@(if (hurd-target?) > '((substitute* …)) > '()) > > …) I'm not entirely familiar with the quoting here, but I trust that this is correct... Does the following patch look okay? --- This test fails on filesystems where tail detects that it cannot use inotify safely. See https://issues.guix.gnu.org/47935 for more details. * gnu/packages/base.scm (coreutils)[phases]: Disable inotify-dir-recreate tests. --- gnu/packages/base.scm | 18 +++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/base.scm b/gnu/packages/base.scm index d30299a7b6..1ab50dfaf9 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/base.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/base.scm @@ -378,13 +378,17 @@ used to apply commands with arbitrarily long arguments.") (("/bin/sh") (which "sh"))) (substitute* (find-files "tests" "\\.sh$") (("#!/bin/sh") (string-append "#!" (which "sh")))))) - ,@(if (hurd-target?) - `((add-after 'unpack 'remove-tests - (lambda _ - (substitute* "Makefile.in" - ;; this test hangs - (("^ *tests/misc/timeout-group.sh.*") ""))))) - '())))) + (add-after 'unpack 'remove-tests + (lambda _ + ,@(if (hurd-target?) + '(substitute* "Makefile.in" + ;; this test hangs + (("^ *tests/misc/timeout-group.sh.*") "")) + '()) + (substitute* "Makefile.in" + ;; fails on filesystems where inotify cannot be used, + ;; more info in #47935 + (("^ *tests/tail-2/inotify-dir-recreate.sh.*") ""))))))) (synopsis "Core GNU utilities (file, text, shell)") (description "GNU Coreutils package includes all of the basic command-line tools that -- 2.31.1