From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47840) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d6Y6u-0006nq-8S for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 05 May 2017 03:57:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d6Y6o-0005Xq-Pp for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 05 May 2017 03:57:08 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57152) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d6Y6o-0005Xl-M3 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 05 May 2017 03:57:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d6Y6o-00080y-GI for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 05 May 2017 03:57:02 -0400 Subject: bug#26702: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add font-cns11643 Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <36cee073-4427-d584-2d9c-c0e2e22fd4ff@openmailbox.org> <87wpa2gcdx.fsf@fastmail.com> <87o9v8crtt.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 09:55:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87o9v8crtt.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Thu, 04 May 2017 23:03:42 +0300") Message-ID: <87mvarbuup.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Alex Kost Cc: 26702@debbugs.gnu.org Alex Kost skribis: > Marius Bakke (2017-04-30 17:10 +0200) wrote: > >>> + (outputs '("out" "tw-kai" "tw-sung")) >>> + (build-system trivial-build-system) >>> + (native-inputs >>> + `(("unzip" ,unzip))) >>> + (arguments >>> + `(#:modules ((guix build utils)) >>> + #:builder >>> + (begin >>> + (use-modules (guix build utils)) >>> + (let* ((font-dir "/share/fonts/truetype/cns11643") >>> + (out (string-append %output font-dir)) >> >> I've changes this to use (assoc-ref outputs "out") instead of the >> magical %output. > > I would leave the magical %output :-) Besides (assoc-ref outputs "out") > wouldn't work here; you probably meant (assoc-ref %outputs "out"). > > Regarding =E2=80=9C%output=E2=80=9D vs =E2=80=9C(assoc-ref %outputs "out"= )=E2=80=9D: I always prefer the > former (Ludovic prefers the latter). Why does =E2=80=9C%output=E2=80=9D = exist anyway, > if not for using it? Both are meant to disappear with the advent of gexps anyway. :-) Ludo=E2=80=99.