From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] build/utils: Add `wrap-language-programs`.
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:07:57 +0100
Message-ID: <87vavk4caa.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20161116132734.5943-1-alex@pompo.co>
	<20161116132734.5943-2-alex@pompo.co>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57837)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1c7sGP-00006u-7i
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:08:10 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1c7sGO-0003uQ-DS
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 18:08:09 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20161116132734.5943-2-alex@pompo.co> (Alex Sassmannshausen's
	message of "Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:27:32 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Alex Sassmannshausen <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Alex Sassmannshausen <alex@pompo.co>

Hey!

Alex Sassmannshausen <alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com> skribis:

> * guix/build/utils.scm (wrap-language-programs): New procedure.

Neat!

> +(define (wrap-language-programs path-proc env-var)

Maybe =E2=80=98program-wrapper=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=98program-wrapping-proced=
ure=E2=80=99 or
=E2=80=98program-wrapping-phase=E2=80=99 to suggest that it returns a proce=
dure?  (I=E2=80=99m
not sure =E2=80=9Clanguage=E2=80=9D is helpful.)

> +  "Return a procedure, which, invoked as part of a `wrap' phase, is capa=
ble of
> +wrapping executables inside an environment in which ENV-VAR is correctly=
 set.
> +
> +The string ENV-VAR is the name of the environmental variable we are sett=
ing
> +for the executable we are wrapping.  PATH-PROC is a procedure of 2 argum=
ents,
> +`inputs' and `outputs', returning the value that we should send ENV-VAR =
to.
> +
> +This is a specialized version of `wrap-program' below, intended specific=
ally
> +to grant all executables that are part of our output access to all libra=
ries
> +that were declared in our inputs.  This is of use for languages such as =
Perl,
> +Python and Guile."

Nitpick: the GCS now recommend straight quotes in ASCII, like 'this'.
:-)

Otherwise this and the 2 subsequent patches LGTM.

Could you make sure that the resulting wrapper is the same, either by
rebuilding one way or another as discussed earlier, or by running the
code =E2=80=9Cby hand=E2=80=9D on an example, maybe in =E2=80=98guix enviro=
nment=E2=80=99?

After that you could commit in =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99.

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.