From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mhw@netris.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] utils: Allow wrap-program to be called multiple times. Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:05:29 -0400 Message-ID: <87lhpmyhh2.fsf@netris.org> References: <871trk2yis.fsf@member.fsf.org> <8738byti9p.fsf@gnu.org> <87sijw122v.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49891) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XT14M-0002nC-3F for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:05:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XT14E-00072V-K3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:05:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87sijw122v.fsf@gmail.com> (Eric Bavier's message of "Sat, 13 Sep 2014 01:12:08 -0500") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Eric Bavier Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Eric Bavier writes: > diff --git a/guix/build/utils.scm b/guix/build/utils.scm > index d169053..7257b30 100644 > --- a/guix/build/utils.scm > +++ b/guix/build/utils.scm > @@ -687,8 +687,7 @@ known as `nuke-refs' in Nixpkgs." > result)))))) > > (define* (wrap-program prog #:rest vars) [... docstring changes ...] > + (define (wrapper-file-name number) > + (format #f "~a/.~a-wrap-~2'0d" (dirname prog) (basename prog) number)) When compiling core-updates, I now see the following warning: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- LC_ALL=C \ ./pre-inst-env \ /home/mhw/.guix-profile/bin/guild compile -L "." -L "." \ -Wformat -Wunbound-variable -Warity-mismatch \ --target="i686-pc-linux-gnu" \ -o "guix/build/utils.go" "guix/build/utils.scm" guix/build/utils.scm:718:4: warning: "~a/.~a-wrap-~2'0d": unsupported format option ~2, use (ice-9 format) instead wrote `guix/build/utils.go' --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Have you verified that this call to 'format' works as expected in all the relevant cases? Thanks, Mark