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: Add higan. Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 17:27:35 +0200 Message-ID: <87k2hzem54.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87fustalcn.fsf@T420.taylan> <87porrkgab.fsf@gnu.org> <87fusn7r5i.fsf@T420.taylan> 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]:44948) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bAfOQ-0004Ik-IV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2016 11:27:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bAfOM-0003sl-RU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2016 11:27:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87fusn7r5i.fsf@T420.taylan> ("Taylan Ulrich \=\?utf-8\?Q\?\=5C\=22Bay\=C4\=B1rl\=C4\=B1\=2FKammer\=5C\=22\=22's\?\= message of "Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:21:13 +0300") 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: Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?=22Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1?= =?utf-8?Q?=2FKammer=22?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer") skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: [...] >> In what sense is it unsuitable? It=E2=80=99s OK to have a couple of pat= ches, >> but it=E2=80=99s not quite OK to host a fork of the upstream package, IM= O (at >> the very least, it can create confusion and make it harder to see how it >> differs from the =E2=80=9Creal=E2=80=9D package.) > > The repo is just for having a consistent place from which the source can > be fetched, as the author doesn't want source bundles to be downloaded > from his website. No changes to the code are made. > > The repo at GitLab didn't seem to tag releases properly. That being > said, now that I look at it, it seems more like an oversight for v098. > Other releases seem to be tagged quite consistently: > > https://gitlab.com/higan/higan/tags > > Should we use that repo instead? It's a bit more official than mine. Yes, I think it would be more appropriate. >>> * The program insists on looking in ~/.local/share for some data files >>> that are actually installed in $prefix/share; does my strategy here >>> look OK, in that I wrap the executable to copy the data files into >>> ~/.local/share every time the program is run? >> >> Sounds like a sledgehammer no? :-) >> >> If those files are immutable, what about patching Higan to look for >> those files in $datadir instead? > > Apparently, the files that are part of the distribution are pure data > files, i.e. fine to be read-only. However, the directory hierarchy of > which they're a part needs to be writable, as higan creates further > files there. With that cp -r, the directory hierarchy is made sure to > be there, and the data files made sure to be up to date. > > Although I didn't look too closely at the sources, patching higan to do > things differently would presumably be a nontrivial task, since it seems > bent on doing things in terms of this directory structure that contains > both pure data and read-write data files. Hmm OK. What do other distros do? Thank you! Ludo=E2=80=99.