bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Hi Guix,

Continuing the discussion Ludo’ started over at guix-devel regarding
package size, note that we have

$ guix size emacs-minimal 
Store-Objekt                                                     Gesamt   Selbst
/gnu/store/lphzb1z0r4kbb453rsvnw7msrxxzp5r7-libgccjit-10.3.0       244.8   128.5  27.2%
/gnu/store/wrzjr2g38f23fqg09rrdcn10va5gc5xl-emacs-minimal-28.2     472.4   110.7  23.4%
/gnu/store/zyqimpkmpffc24nwwqp46cicj8ss85y5-binutils-2.37          126.0    54.4  11.5%
/gnu/store/ayc9r7162rphy4zjw8ch01pmyh214h82-glibc-2.33              76.6    36.6   7.8%
/gnu/store/5h2w4qi9hk1qzzgi1w83220ydslinr4s-glibc-2.33              38.3    36.6   7.7%
/gnu/store/6d0pl5khj08j3c2619jnypc8bznspgx8-gcc-10.3.0-lib          71.7    33.4   7.1%
/gnu/store/094bbaq6glba86h1d4cj16xhdi6fk2jl-gcc-10.3.0-lib          71.7    33.4   7.1%
/gnu/store/8fpk2cja3f07xls48jfnpgrzrljpqivr-coreutils-8.32          91.6    16.4   3.5%
/gnu/store/9rrnm5hdjw7cy96a2a9rfgh6y08wsbmf-ncurses-6.2.20210619    77.6     5.9   1.3%
/gnu/store/pmq05n0q25v4qjyibxfrp53v4391k7vh-mpfr-4.1.0              78.4     4.0   0.9%
/gnu/store/ajw8nnrnd6hr183skwqdgc8c7mazg97h-isl-0.23                77.3     2.9   0.6%
/gnu/store/fwbiihd2sbhai63y1pvvdh0f2bakfzrf-gmp-6.2.1               74.4     2.7   0.6%
/gnu/store/4f304c7dp68hkcp1zi1i07zm8nfvvyp7-bash-static-5.1.8        1.7     1.7   0.4%
/gnu/store/720rj90bch716isd8z7lcwrnvz28ap4y-bash-static-5.1.8        1.7     1.7   0.4%
/gnu/store/4y5m9lb8k3qkb1y9m02sw9w9a6hacd16-bash-minimal-5.1.8      39.3     1.0   0.2%
/gnu/store/xjwp2hsd9256icjjybfrmznppjicywf6-grep-3.6                73.5     0.8   0.2%
/gnu/store/ba02g5xkqiss6s5z8mbj9cvkal6l7b9g-mpc-1.2.1               78.8     0.4   0.1%
/gnu/store/a38k2v29l6l0iz6pmlk4dmzwdbvl10lq-acl-2.3.1               72.3     0.3   0.1%
/gnu/store/a7ggx0af69gv4k5mr1k617p4vy9kgx2v-libcap-2.62             72.0     0.3   0.1%
/gnu/store/jkjs0inmzhj4vsvclbf08nmh0shm7lrf-attr-2.5.1              71.9     0.2   0.1%
/gnu/store/8qv5kb2fgm4c3bf70zcg9l6hkf3qzpw9-zlib-1.2.11             71.9     0.2   0.0%
/gnu/store/0c1yfbxyv877mlgychfgvmk5ha2jqh52-gzip-1.10               73.7     0.2   0.0%
Gesamt: 472.4 MiB

but 

$ guix graph --path emacs-minimal libgccjit 
guix graph: Fehler: Kein Pfad von „emacs-minimal@28.2“ nach
„libgccjit@12.2.0“

and 

$ guix graph --path /gnu/store/wrzjr2g38f23fqg09rrdcn10va5gc5xl-emacs-
minimal-28.2 /gnu/store/lphzb1z0r4kbb453rsvnw7msrxxzp5r7-libgccjit-
10.3.0 --type=referrers
guix graph: Fehler: Kein Pfad von
„/gnu/store/wrzjr2g38f23fqg09rrdcn10va5gc5xl-emacs-minimal-28.2“ nach
„/gnu/store/lphzb1z0r4kbb453rsvnw7msrxxzp5r7-libgccjit-10.3.0“

This is rather curious.  How does libgccjit land in emacs-minimal's
closure?

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

[Josselin Poiret via Bug reports for GNU Guix]

Hi Lily,

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> writes:

> This is rather curious.  How does libgccjit land in emacs-minimal's
> closure?

The patch-compilation-driver phase in the inherited emacs package wires
in a reference to libgccjit.  It would need to be replaced in
emacs-minimal.

Best,
-- 
Josselin Poiret

bug#60831: [PATCH] gnu: emacs-minimal: Do not patch compilation driver.

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though it has
been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal.

* gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-compilation-driver’.
---
Thanks Josselin for pointing this out.

 gnu/packages/emacs.scm | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/emacs.scm b/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
index 97d46486c7..83b9afb633 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/emacs.scm
@@ -448,6 +448,7 @@ (define-public emacs-minimal
        ((#:phases phases)
         #~(modify-phases #$phases
             (delete 'set-libgccjit-path)
+            (delete 'patch-compilation-driver)
             (delete 'restore-emacs-pdmp)
             (delete 'strip-double-wrap)))))
     (inputs (list ncurses coreutils gzip))
-- 
2.38.1

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> writes:

> The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though it has
> been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal.
>
> * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-compilation-driver’.
> ---
> Thanks Josselin for pointing this out.

I'd add the following git tag "Reported-by: Josselin Poiret <email>"
instead, but otherwise LGTM.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> skribis:

> The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though it has
> been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal.
>
> * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-compilation-driver’.
> ---
> Thanks Josselin for pointing this out.

Yay, thanks for fixing it!

Perhaps you can add:

  #:disallowed-references (list libgccjit)

for good measure in ‘emacs-minimal’.

Anyway, LGTM too, thanks!

Ludo’.

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Dienstag, dem 17.01.2023 um 10:55 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though
> > it has been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal.
> > 
> > * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-
> > compilation-driver’.
> > ---
> > Thanks Josselin for pointing this out.
> 
> I'd add the following git tag "Reported-by: Josselin Poiret <email>"
> instead, but otherwise LGTM.
I pushed it without the tag because I initially reported the pulling
in; although Josselin did help in finding how it was pulled in.

Anyway, this particular bug should be fixed now.  As for larger "Are
our graphs okay?" style bugs, I think we can definitely answer those
with "No.", given that cargo hasn't been replaced with antioxidant yet.
Thus, I'm closing this.

Cheers