From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id +JVhGiOHlmBSnwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 08 May 2021 14:42:11 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id GN79FSOHlmC6cwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 08 May 2021 12:42:11 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B060314772 for ; Sat, 8 May 2021 14:42:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:42304 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMHY-0003Tj-Te for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:42:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52896) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMHS-0003TI-2L for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:42:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:38517) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMHR-000163-Qm for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:42:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMHR-00078H-Of for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:42:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#48225: Wrong result of package-name->name+version Resent-From: Guillaume Le Vaillant Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 08 May 2021 12:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48225 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Received: via spool by 48225-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48225.162047767927411 (code B ref 48225); Sat, 08 May 2021 12:42:01 +0000 Received: (at 48225) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 May 2021 12:41:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50061 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMGl-000783-Hp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:41:19 -0400 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:38643) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfMGk-00077w-59 for 48225@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 May 2021 08:41:18 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCFA52400FD for <48225@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 8 May 2021 14:41:11 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1620477671; bh=MM09+O7MOox6dkvCNcDUmzgwYfVmDn28o0u7cL2PXOM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=rwJaseoDKuUa44jQ3W5oevHwNauEjo7nTUwG+ENJsIcYeiyb0fcFc3U2NObSDnm7l +JLarkrvejh2HdL5YVVmPGFNRoBSCOUVe+CSdouYULhJ7UlX2dQEkNx0RRpIrU8hD4 N5WKOrRRBG/aiKrduRsIAydY8OVFDa9aVBsQKNjR0LgoV04E5UT6qiIEUtKl4AHum1 9Ra02i2bQuBNxtwu1Re1UBW68xHUO+m5neL30/5OGlyS829on6X4pfbZzdTmbDiOcV ooocU8gZwQfkrgTqKo4UeF4VNlcUx8oQB3hMkjwA8F8MdZrCruhXhU4u4/XNWak4p1 QYsxeOhHycrcg== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Fcn461P3Mz6tmH; Sat, 8 May 2021 14:41:10 +0200 (CEST) References: <87o8dqy636.fsf@yamatai> <8735v0b53e.fsf@yamatai> <87v97t8qrc.fsf@gnu.org> From: Guillaume Le Vaillant In-reply-to: <87v97t8qrc.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 08 May 2021 12:41:09 +0000 Message-ID: <87r1ihieje.fsf@kitej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 48225@debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Prikler , Sharlatan Hellseher Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1620477731; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:resent-cc:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references: list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post: dkim-signature; bh=O2wVQ9LTt+nfJLiaeWpERBHJIcTZdG0/UjF2WKizck8=; b=HJdhuLXE5lht1J4Xf65IBFk339qrZ3itLcx0L6kBSkkT4HcghRP5HfmcWBcjHzndN5IiJ6 CJHjFBu8X3tO/9NpP/BeFkM/NpjXIniTrcEHobzii25NlP/OECr4Lo7uxn+IeOeX8UbCnC Hdt2l0P76t/Pce0cksXTB452ZI8qe8qOhC/t/3TMyz5Igs33PmB94R9ae8qZBWXv5rYrvS MdezFrMfORDGlH4WuGeApx7/zqIMKGcOjBrkjaQRDBmCOVvS7yo7fDa9kuggsTEGTrWDey hcMBdyT4Dp7JejspYVHHofrlI1wLyhkJuBRZymqpJ/cqZC4rT0oru0UDW0qcaA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1620477731; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=FLLj/9AK89kBMG7lIDmMN5Ls3VLDp5GsQpFGIFGUv6mgS+7wiN+8rWgsEzqJ2mPCRxYecW KPd8yjAJqAj32DHHZNEs2t4J5opKvuU9cSnQVmlFdhtM8CRp1Vrk6YaBthK95IRNHWxn4a wszqX7UYhfn/CtZfBNRAJR9sunYHRQBLklF+JpCYHdhcKead7DTgm23TyJGZ6GqKUHTOO/ IXtqPCm9kFQUGVbtV1urRDWWrpQFgaJn3LFIHl9Cdo09jUqlr3BO6v+sGRqyZWVGtBkuAS b9J1V2QRefL8FqRzCrz7q/0OUtObWufLQZCXCLi1PPJiw7xxpNepVEYoRTIO6g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=rwJaseoD; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.95 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=rwJaseoD; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B060314772 X-Spam-Score: -2.95 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: 0u43b3J2bNc4 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s skribis: > Hi Guillaume, > > Guillaume Le Vaillant skribis: > >> From 1e37a89b943a818b5274c1d5f31143ca48bad40a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Guillaume Le Vaillant >> Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 10:32:56 +0200 >> Subject: [PATCH] build-system: asdf: Work around package-name->name+vers= ion >> bug. >> >> This patch modifies how the name of the main Common Lisp system is extra= cted >> from the full Guix package name to work around bug#48225 concerning the >> 'package-name->name+version' function. >> >> Fixes . >> >> * guix/build-system/asdf.scm (asdf-build): Fix 'systems' function. >> * guix/build/asdf-build-system.scm (main-system-name): Fix it. > > If it works for you, sounds good to me. Please do rebuild as many CL > packages, with different CL implementations, to make sure we do not > overlook any corner case. > >> + (let* ((lisp-prefix (string-append lisp-type "-")) >> + (package-name (hyphen-separated-name->name+version >> + (if (string-prefix? lisp-prefix name) >> + (string-drop name >> + (string-length lisp-pr= efix)) >> + name)))) >> + `(quote ,(list package-name))) > > I=E2=80=99d like to see a FIXME in there: this is all guesswork and we sh= ould > eventually replace guesses with known-good info. > > What would it take to pass the right package name and implementation > name upfront from the package? > > Thanks, > Ludo=E2=80=99. I tried rebuilding all the sbcl-*, cl-* and ecl-* packages, as well as stumpwm, uglify-js and nyxt, and I didn't see new failures. I pushed the patch as 2fa8fd4af59af0de392352915fa50fc21a4cf98a. When 'package-name->name+version' returns a bad result leading to an incorrect default Lisp system name being computed, it can be overridden using the '#:asd-systems' parameter of 'asdf-build-system', which should work around the problem in almost all cases. However I suppose other build systems could have issues if they make use of 'package-name->name+version' on a package with a name like "abc-123-def-1.2.3" (depending how they use the result). --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIUEAREKAC0WIQTLxZxm7Ce5cXlAaz5r6CCK3yH+PwUCYJaG5Q8cZ2x2QHBvc3Rl by5uZXQACgkQa+ggit8h/j9xigD/U6jKF9r1pA36vLz2ylC/jR55bxg/UjOys3lz MipayOQBAJRyhM74/cziP6bpAzuhap7LEB+tCWrL9qXbp0yZSXGv =DUq0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--