From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Release 1.0.1 of GNU MPC
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:44:15 +0100
Message-ID: <87a9tj8jww.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <201212112302.35675.andreas@enge.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58170)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Timbr-0005rm-4S
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:44:33 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Timbh-0002f6-LW
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:44:27 -0500
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.82]:27565)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1Timbh-0002do-Eh
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:44:17 -0500
In-Reply-To: <201212112302.35675.andreas@enge.fr> (Andreas Enge's message of
	"Tue, 11 Dec 2012 23:02:35 +0100")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Hi,

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> Unfortunately, I could not test it yet, since guix-package starts by=20
> building path(s) `/nix/store/9syafc8xvscaywjldyszzgkc8pljwpj6-gcc-cross-
> boot0-4.7.2'
>
> although gcc-4.7.2 (without "coss-boot") is already there. How come?
> The previous mpc release built without problem without re-downloading gcc.
>
> Actually, the same holds for the unmodified mpfr - after changing the
> definition of mpc in multiprecision.scm, installing mpfr also starts by
> redownloading gcc.
>
> Is it related to the dependency of gcc on mpfr and mpc?

Yes, exactly: =E2=80=9Ceverything=E2=80=9D depends on GCC, and GCC depends =
on GMP, MPFR,
and MPC.  Thus, upgrading one of these leads to a rebuild of everything.

The way to address it (as is done in Nixpkgs) is to have a staging
branch for such changes, and to merge it once in a while.  So now is the
time to inaugurate a new branch.  :-)

Would it be an option for you to send a =E2=80=98git format-patch=E2=80=99 =
kind of
patch?

Thanks!

Ludo=E2=80=99.