From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: various packaging issues Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 19:09:34 +0200 Message-ID: <87r2xdpt81.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87lgnlhhto.fsf@c-l07itc0gcrgz.its.manchester.ac.uk> 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]:37829) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXW0J-0006FG-Qi for help-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:09:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXW0I-0003hw-R8 for help-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:09:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87lgnlhhto.fsf@c-l07itc0gcrgz.its.manchester.ac.uk> (Dave Love's message of "Tue, 18 Jul 2017 16:42:59 +0100") List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" To: Dave Love Cc: help-guix@gnu.org Hello Dave, Glad to see another Guix user in HPC! Dave Love skribis: > * I should specify a disjunction of licences like "BSD or GPLv2" rather > than the conjunction, which seems to be represented as a list (though > the doc doesn't say what a list represents). I.e. in Fedora-ish > rpm-speak, I have A or B, rather than C and D. Is that possible? We cannot specify it currently, so what we do is just provide a list of license objects as the =E2=80=98license=E2=80=99 field and explain the mean= ing of the list in a comment. Clearly this can be improved, though we have to pay attention of overengineering in this domain. > * RPM specs commonly have multiple sources specified, e.g. source and > doc or example tarballs, or configuration files of some kind which > aren't patches. Is there a way to do that? The =E2=80=98source=E2=80=99 field can be only one thing. However, you can= always specify additional origin objects as inputs. There are multiple examples of that. > * What if I effectively have multiple build systems? For instance a > python interface needs to be built with an explicit > "python... setup.py" with an overall autotools build. While I figured > out how to build and install in that situation, at least for one > python, it looks messy. I wonder what the recommended way is, > particularly to provide python2 and python3 modules, or for other > things like Java or Perl components. Most of the time there=E2=80=99s one build system that drives the others, so you=E2=80=99d just specify that one. If you really need bits of one build system and bits of another, you still have to choose the =E2=80=9Cmain=E2=80=9D one, and then you can manua= lly pick build phases from the other build system(s) you=E2=80=99re interested in. I think there are a few examples of that, like things that combine =E2=80=98glib-or-gtk-build-system=E2=80=99 with =E2=80=98python-build-syste= m=E2=80=99. That=E2=80=99s not a great answer, but that=E2=80=99s what we have so far. For Python 2 vs. 3, there=E2=80=99s the =E2=80=98package-with-python2=E2=80= =99 procedure, which you can see in (gnu packages python). HTH! Ludo=E2=80=99.