[bug#45368] [PATCH core-updates 0/3] Help2man updates

["Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>]

Hi,

Apologies for the laaaate reply!

Miguel Ángel Arruga Vivas <rosen644835@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Miguel Ángel Arruga Vivas <rosen644835@gmail.com> skribis:
>>> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> If the problem is just the generation of help2man’s own documentation
>>>> when cross-compiling, perhaps we need to add itself as a native input
>>>> when cross-compiling?
>>>
>>> Yup, that sounds the cleanest solution.  Nonetheless...
>>>
>>>> Anyhow that doesn’t sound like a showstopper to me.
>>>
>>> It currently isn't at all, as it says as soon as I tried:
>>>
>>>   [...] build system `perl' does not support cross builds
>>>
>>> Also, they use a LD_PRELOAD library for the translation, which seems
>>> suspicious too.
>>
>> Hmm OK.
>
> Would it make sense to keep a help2man-minimal without nls support (or a
> new help2man-with-nls variable) for bootstrapping purposes?

‘help2man-minimal’ sounds like a good idea, yes.

Would that solve the problem at hand?

>>>> Yes, that’s a good idea.  There’s already a procedure to generate a
>>>> locale package IIRC.  We just have to make sure its result is properly
>>>> memoized so that performance doesn’t suffer.
>>>
>>> I was thinking about the implicit input "locales" and replacing it with
>>> a package generated based on the arguments provided to the build system,
>>> but I guess you're thinking about build-locale from (gnu build locale)
>>> and its usage for the system locales on (gnu system locale).  Should it
>>> be then another derivation at (guix build-system gnu) level?  Any
>>> pointer about this is more than welcome.
>>
>> I was actually thinking about a variant of ‘make-glibc-utf8-locales’
>> that… never got committed?!
>>
>>   https://issues.guix.gnu.org/44075#7
>>
>> The patch you proposed there LGTM.  Looks like you forgot to commit it.
>> :-)
>
> And now you know why I wasn't getting it, I even forgot that it was
> already there.  :-(
>
> There's still a dependency chain between (gnu packages base) and (gnu
> packages man)---I tried to use the full glibc-locales to do the test
> before remembering this, so I need to spend a bit of time on this too.

OK.

Ludo’.