From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Make "guix-devel" a public variable in package-management.scm Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 16:24:14 +0200 Message-ID: <87funtivld.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8760patokz.fsf@gmail.com> <87a8ei5vj2.fsf@gnu.org> <8737k617my.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40793) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bwVJU-0002tt-S1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 10:24:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bwVJQ-00019N-SM for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 10:24:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <8737k617my.fsf@gmail.com> (Chris Marusich's message of "Sat, 08 Oct 2016 21:14:13 -0700") 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: Chris Marusich Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Chris, Chris Marusich skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: [...] >> (define-public guix guix-devel) >>=20=20 >> +(define-public guix-for-environment >> + ;; We provide this pseudo-package just to allow people to run: >> + ;; guix environment guix-devel >> + ;; to reliably get the development environment for Guix (using 'guix'= for >> + ;; this purpose does not work when 'guix' points to the built-from-ta= rball >> + ;; package rather than to the built-from-checkout package.) >> + (package >> + (inherit guix-devel) >> + (name "guix-devel") >> + (source #f) ;not meant to be built >> + (supported-systems '()))) >> + >> (define (source-file? file stat) >> "Return true if FILE is likely a source file, false if it is a typical >> generated file." >> >> >> ? >> >> If that=E2=80=99s fine with you, could you incorporate it in your patch? > > Sounds good to me. I've attached the updated patch to this email and > mentioned you as co-author. The new package fails to build with a > cryptic error, but since it isn't meant to be built, that seems OK. > > What is the purpose of temporarily changing the "guix" variable to refer > to the release package (as in commit 4420940f)? Because it usually > refers to the development version, wouldn't it be better to make the > "guix" variable ALWAYS refer to the development version? It isn't clear > to me why we need to temporarily change this variable to refer to the > release version. Somehow this question turned out to be difficult to answer to me, which contributed to the delay. ;-) I think you=E2=80=99re right: in a way, this is a bit silly. This is a pur= ist=E2=80=99s approach (when we have the tarball, no need to depend on Autoconf et al.), but it would work just fine if we simply added the =E2=80=98native-in= puts=E2=80=99 currently on =E2=80=98guix-devel=E2=80=99 to =E2=80=98guix-0.11.0=E2=80=99 = itself. If there are no objections, I=E2=80=99ll just do that. Thanks, and sorry for taking so long for such a simple answer! Ludo=E2=80=99.