Hi Ludo,

Whoops!  I guess I was a little slow getting my patch in.  I’ve
highlighted a few sources you missed below, as well as attached my patch
(for comparison and for listing the new hashes of the missing sources).

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> * gnu/packages/java.scm (java-geronimo-xbean-reflect):

Also java-geronimo-genesis-2.1.

> * gnu/packages/tex.scm (texlive-hyphen-base): Likewise.
> (texlive-dvips): Likewise.

Also texlive-dvipdfmx.

> (texlive-cm): Likewise.
> (texlive-tex-plain): Likewise.
> (texlive-kpathsea): Likewise
> (texlive-latexconfig): Likewise.
> (texlive-tetex): Likewise.
> (texlive-pdftex): Likewise.

Also texlive-xetex.

There’s also the “texlive-scripts” input in texlive-bin, and the
“texlive-luatexconfig” native input in texlive-latex-base.

> [...]

I generated a big diff for all 17 sources that I found (mostly because
it excites me that Guix can do stuff like that).  Basically all the
changes were boring (as we expected).

For “texlive-scripts”, I added a phase that approximates keyword
expansion for the few scripts that use it to output version information.
It‘s not exactly the same as what Subversion does.  Subversion uses the
last revision that updated the given file, and I just use
‘%texlive-revision’ for every file.  I’m not too attached to this
approach, but it felt like the right thing to do.

> The second patch makes ‘recursive?’ default to #f, which AFAICS is
> what all the SVN-using packages that were not explicit expected (no
> changes required).

I also carefully checked turning recursion off by default.  I’m
confident that nothing changes.


-- Tim