* [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
@ 2021-07-01 11:39 Maxime Devos
2021-07-06 17:29 ` Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 17:43 ` [bug#49315] " Mathieu Othacehe
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maxime Devos @ 2021-07-01 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 49315
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 380 bytes --]
Hi Guix,
These two patches add a 'wrapper-inputs' linter.
It detects if "wrap-program" is used without adding
"bash" or "bash-minimal" to 'inputs'. Adding "bash"
or "bash-minimal" is necessary when cross-compiling,
otherwise the resulting wrapper will use an interpreter
for the wrong architecture.
This linter detects 365 problematic packages.
Greetings,
Maxime.
[-- Attachment #1.2: 0001-lint-Define-some-procedures-for-analysing-code-in-ph.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 6689 bytes --]
From 18a7cfcbe54e20c80afd55e21c504a872c053593 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 12:51:14 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] lint: Define some procedures for analysing code in
phases.
* guix/lint.scm
(check-optional-tests): Extract logic for extracting the phases from a
package to ...
(find-phase-deltas): ... here, and ...
(report-bogus-phase-deltas): ... here.
(check-optional-tests)[check-check-procedure]: Extract code for extracting
the procedure body to ...
(find-procedure-body) ... here.
(find-phase-procedure): New procedure.
(report-bogus-phase-procedure): New procedure.
---
guix/lint.scm | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 83 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/guix/lint.scm b/guix/lint.scm
index c637929c38..f54f6949ec 100644
--- a/guix/lint.scm
+++ b/guix/lint.scm
@@ -160,6 +160,77 @@
((_ package (G_ message) rest ...)
(%make-warning package message rest ...))))
+\f
+;;;
+;;; Procedures for analysing Scheme code in package definitions
+;;;
+
+(define* (find-procedure-body expression found
+ #:key (not-found (const '())))
+ "Try to find the body of the procedure defined inline by EXPRESSION.
+If it was found, call EXPRESSION with its body. If it wasn't, call
+the thunk NOT-FOUND."
+ (match expression
+ (`(,(or 'let 'let*) . ,_)
+ (find-procedure-body (car (last-pair expression)) found
+ #:not-found not-found))
+ (`(,(or 'lambda 'lambda*) ,_ . ,code)
+ (found code))
+ (_ (not-found))))
+
+(define* (report-bogus-phase-deltas package bogus-deltas)
+ "Report a bogus invocation of ‘modify-phases’."
+ (list (make-warning package
+ ;; TRANSLATORS: 'modify-phases' is a Scheme syntax
+ ;; and should not be translated.
+ (G_ "incorrect call to ‘modify-phases’")
+ #:field 'arguments)))
+
+(define* (find-phase-deltas package found
+ #:key (not-found (const '()))
+ (bogus (cut report-bogus-phase-deltas package <>)))
+ "Try to find the clauses of the ‘modify-phases’ form in the phases
+specification of PACKAGE. If they were found, all FOUND with a list
+of the clauses. If they weren't (e.g. because ‘modify-phases’ wasn't
+used at all), call the thunk NOT-FOUND instead. If ‘modify-phases’
+was used, but the clauses don't form a list, call BOGUS with the
+not-a-list."
+ (apply (lambda* (#:key phases #:allow-other-keys)
+ (define phases/sexp
+ (if (gexp? phases)
+ (gexp->approximate-sexp phases)
+ phases))
+ (match phases/sexp
+ (`(modify-phases ,_ . ,changes)
+ ((if (list? changes) found bogus) changes))
+ (_ (not-found))))
+ (package-arguments package)))
+
+(define (report-bogus-phase-procedure package)
+ "Report a syntactically-invalid phase clause."
+ (list (make-warning package
+ ;; TRANSLATORS: See ‘modify-phases’ in the manual.
+ (G_ "invalid phase clause")
+ #:field 'arguments)))
+
+(define* (find-phase-procedure package expression found
+ #:key (not-found (const '()))
+ (bogus (cut report-bogus-phase-procedure
+ package)))
+ "Try to find the procedure in the phase clause EXPRESSION. If it was
+found, call FOUND with the procedure expression. If EXPRESSION isn't
+actually a phase clause, call the thunk BOGUS. If the phase form doesn't
+have a procedure, call the thunk NOT-FOUND."
+ (match expression
+ (('add-after before after proc-expr)
+ (found proc-expr))
+ (('add-before after before proc-expr)
+ (found proc-expr))
+ (('replace _ proc-expr)
+ (found proc-expr))
+ (('delete _) (not-found))
+ (_ (bogus))))
+
\f
;;;
;;; Checkers
@@ -1063,46 +1134,25 @@ descriptions maintained upstream."
(define (sexp-uses-tests?? sexp)
"Test if SEXP contains the symbol 'tests?'."
(sexp-contains-atom? sexp 'tests?))
+ (define (check-procedure-body code)
+ (if (sexp-uses-tests?? code)
+ '()
+ (list (make-warning package
+ ;; TRANSLATORS: check and #:tests? are a
+ ;; Scheme symbol and keyword respectively
+ ;; and should not be translated.
+ (G_ "the 'check' phase should respect #:tests?")
+ #:field 'arguments))))
(define (check-check-procedure expression)
- (match expression
- (`(,(or 'let 'let*) . ,_)
- (check-check-procedure (car (last-pair expression))))
- (`(,(or 'lambda 'lambda*) ,_ . ,code)
- (if (sexp-uses-tests?? code)
- '()
- (list (make-warning package
- ;; TRANSLATORS: check and #:tests? are a
- ;; Scheme symbol and keyword respectively
- ;; and should not be translated.
- (G_ "the 'check' phase should respect #:tests?")
- #:field 'arguments))))
- (_ '())))
+ (find-procedure-body expression check-procedure-body))
(define (check-phases-delta delta)
(match delta
(`(replace 'check ,expression)
(check-check-procedure expression))
(_ '())))
(define (check-phases-deltas deltas)
- (match deltas
- (() '())
- ((head . tail)
- (append (check-phases-delta head)
- (check-phases-deltas tail)))
- (_ (list (make-warning package
- ;; TRANSLATORS: modify-phases is a Scheme
- ;; syntax and must not be translated.
- (G_ "incorrect call to ‘modify-phases’")
- #:field 'arguments)))))
- (apply (lambda* (#:key phases #:allow-other-keys)
- (define phases/sexp
- (if (gexp? phases)
- (gexp->approximate-sexp phases)
- phases))
- (match phases/sexp
- (`(modify-phases ,_ . ,changes)
- (check-phases-deltas changes))
- (_ '())))
- (package-arguments package)))
+ (append-map check-phases-delta deltas))
+ (find-phase-deltas package check-phases-deltas))
(define* (check-derivation package #:key store)
"Emit a warning if we fail to compile PACKAGE to a derivation."
--
2.32.0
[-- Attachment #1.3: 0002-lint-Lint-usages-of-wrap-program-without-a-bash-inpu.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 9749 bytes --]
From 776db32c98ad3a2bad0f81c3314878fa9eea84ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 12:59:52 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] lint: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash"
input.
When using 'wrap-program', "bash" (or "bash-minimal") should be
in inputs. Otherwise, when cross-compiling, 'wrap-program' will use
a native bash instead of the cross bash and the 'patch-shebangs' won't
be able to correct this.
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice is added to the copyright lines because
a part of the "straw-viewer" package definition is included.
This linter detects 365 problematic package definitions at time
of writing.
* guix/lint.scm
(report-wrap-program-error): New procedure.
(check-wrapper-inputs): New linter.
(%local-checkers)[wrapper-inputs]: Add the new linter.
("explicit #:sh argument to 'wrap-program' is acceptable")
("'check-wrapper-inputs' detects 'wrap-program' without \"bash\" in inputs")
("'check-wrapper-inputs' detects 'wrap-qt-program' without \"bash\" in inputs")
("\"bash\" in 'inputs' satisfies 'check-wrapper-inputs'")
("\"bash-minimal\" in 'inputs' satisfies 'check-wrapper-inputs'")
("'cut' doesn't hide bad usages of 'wrap-program'")
("bogus phase specifications don't crash the linter"): New tests.
---
guix/lint.scm | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
tests/lint.scm | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 136 insertions(+)
diff --git a/guix/lint.scm b/guix/lint.scm
index f54f6949ec..e12b35bca8 100644
--- a/guix/lint.scm
+++ b/guix/lint.scm
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@
#:export (check-description-style
check-inputs-should-be-native
check-inputs-should-not-be-an-input-at-all
+ check-wrapper-inputs
check-patch-file-names
check-patch-headers
check-synopsis-style
@@ -489,6 +490,49 @@ of a package, and INPUT-NAMES, a list of package specifications such as
(package-input-intersection (package-direct-inputs package)
input-names))))
+(define (report-wrap-program-error package wrapper-name)
+ "Warn that \"bash-minimal\" is missing from 'inputs', while WRAPPER-NAME
+requires it."
+ (make-warning package
+ (G_ "\"bash-minimal\" should be in 'inputs' when '~a' is used")
+ (list wrapper-name)))
+
+(define (check-wrapper-inputs package)
+ "Emit a warning if PACKAGE uses 'wrap-program' or similar, but \"bash\"
+or \"bash-minimal\" is not in its inputs. 'wrap-script' is not supported."
+ (define input-names '("bash" "bash-minimal"))
+ (define has-bash-input?
+ (pair? (package-input-intersection (package-inputs package)
+ input-names)))
+ (define (check-procedure-body body)
+ (match body
+ ;; Explicitely setting an interpreter is acceptable,
+ ;; #:sh support is added on 'core-updates'.
+ ;; TODO(core-updates): remove mention of core-updates.
+ (('wrap-program _ '#:sh . _) '())
+ (('wrap-program _ . _)
+ (list (report-wrap-program-error package 'wrap-program)))
+ ;; Wrapper of 'wrap-program' for Qt programs.
+ ;; TODO #:sh is not yet supported but probably will be.
+ (('wrap-qt-program _ '#:sh . _) '())
+ (('wrap-qt-program _ . _)
+ (list (report-wrap-program-error package 'wrap-qt-program)))
+ ((x . y)
+ (append (check-procedure-body x) (check-procedure-body y)))
+ (_ '())))
+ (define (check-phase-procedure expression)
+ (find-procedure-body expression check-procedure-body))
+ (define (check-delta expression)
+ (find-phase-procedure package expression check-phase-procedure))
+ (define (check-deltas deltas)
+ (append-map check-delta deltas))
+ (if has-bash-input?
+ ;; "bash" (or "bash-minimal") is in 'inputs', so everything seems ok.
+ '()
+ ;; "bash" is not in 'inputs'. Verify 'wrap-program' and friends
+ ;; are unused
+ (find-phase-deltas package check-deltas)))
+
(define (package-name-regexp package)
"Return a regexp that matches PACKAGE's name as a word at the beginning of a
line."
@@ -1687,6 +1731,10 @@ them for PACKAGE."
(name 'inputs-should-not-be-input)
(description "Identify inputs that shouldn't be inputs at all")
(check check-inputs-should-not-be-an-input-at-all))
+ (lint-checker
+ (name 'wrapper-inputs)
+ (description "Make sure 'wrap-program' can finds its interpreter.")
+ (check check-wrapper-inputs))
(lint-checker
(name 'license)
;; TRANSLATORS: <license> is the name of a data type and must not be
diff --git a/tests/lint.scm b/tests/lint.scm
index 4ef400a9a0..82971db8f0 100644
--- a/tests/lint.scm
+++ b/tests/lint.scm
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
;;; Copyright © 2017 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
;;; Copyright © 2018, 2019 Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>
;;; Copyright © 2020 Timothy Sample <samplet@ngyro.com>
+;;; Copyright © 2020 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
;;; Copyright © 2021 Xinglu Chen <public@yoctocell.xyz>
;;; Copyright © 2021 Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
;;;
@@ -47,6 +48,7 @@
#:use-module (gnu packages glib)
#:use-module (gnu packages pkg-config)
#:use-module (gnu packages python-xyz)
+ #:use-module ((gnu packages bash) #:select (bash bash-minimal))
#:use-module (web uri)
#:use-module (web server)
#:use-module (web server http)
@@ -357,6 +359,92 @@
`(("python-setuptools" ,python-setuptools))))))
(check-inputs-should-not-be-an-input-at-all pkg))))
+(test-equal "explicit #:sh argument to 'wrap-program' is acceptable"
+ '()
+ (let* ((phases
+ ;; Loosely based on the "catfish" package
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'wrap
+ (lambda* (#:key inputs outputs #:allow-other-keys)
+ (define catfish (string-append (assoc-ref outputs "out")
+ "/bin/catfish"))
+ (define hsab (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "hsab")
+ "/bin/hsab"))
+ (wrap-program catfish #:sh hsab
+ `("PYTHONPATH" = (,"blabla")))))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases)))))
+ (check-wrapper-inputs pkg)))
+
+(test-equal
+ "'check-wrapper-inputs' detects 'wrap-program' without \"bash\" in inputs"
+ "\"bash-minimal\" should be in 'inputs' when 'wrap-program' is used"
+ (let* ((phases
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'wrap
+ (lambda _
+ (wrap-program the-binary bla-bla)))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases)))))
+ (single-lint-warning-message (check-wrapper-inputs pkg))))
+
+(test-equal
+ "'check-wrapper-inputs' detects 'wrap-qt-program' without \"bash\" in inputs"
+ "\"bash-minimal\" should be in 'inputs' when 'wrap-qt-program' is used"
+ (let* ((phases
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'qtwrap
+ (lambda _
+ (wrap-qt-program the-binary bla-bla)))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases)))))
+ (single-lint-warning-message (check-wrapper-inputs pkg))))
+
+(test-equal "\"bash\" in 'inputs' satisfies 'check-wrapper-inputs'"
+ '()
+ (let* ((phases
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'wrap
+ (lambda _
+ (wrap-program the-binary bla-bla)))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases))
+ (inputs `(("bash" ,bash))))))
+ (check-wrapper-inputs pkg)))
+
+(test-equal "\"bash-minimal\" in 'inputs' satisfies 'check-wrapper-inputs'"
+ '()
+ (let* ((phases
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'wrap
+ (lambda _
+ (wrap-program THE-BINARY bla-bla)))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases))
+ (inputs `(("bash-minimal" ,bash-minimal))))))
+ (check-wrapper-inputs pkg)))
+
+(test-equal "'cut' doesn't hide bad usages of 'wrap-program'"
+ "\"bash-minimal\" should be in 'inputs' when 'wrap-program' is used"
+ (let* ((phases
+ ;; Taken from the "straw-viewer" package
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-after 'install 'wrap-program
+ (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
+ (let* ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out"))
+ (bin-dir (string-append out "/bin/"))
+ (site-dir (string-append out "/lib/perl5/site_perl/"))
+ (lib-path (getenv "PERL5LIB")))
+ (for-each (cut wrap-program <>
+ `("PERL5LIB" ":" prefix
+ (,lib-path ,site-dir)))
+ (find-files bin-dir)))))))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases)))))
+ (single-lint-warning-message (check-wrapper-inputs pkg))))
+
+(test-equal "bogus phase specifications don't crash the linter"
+ "invalid phase clause"
+ (let* ((phases
+ `(modify-phases %standard-phases
+ (add-invalid)))
+ (pkg (dummy-package "x" (arguments `(#:phases ,phases)))))
+ (single-lint-warning-message (check-wrapper-inputs pkg))))
+
(test-equal "file patches: different file name -> warning"
"file names of patches should start with the package name"
(single-lint-warning-message
--
2.32.0
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
2021-07-01 11:39 [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input Maxime Devos
@ 2021-07-06 17:29 ` Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 20:38 ` Maxime Devos
2021-07-06 17:43 ` [bug#49315] " Mathieu Othacehe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Othacehe @ 2021-07-06 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maxime Devos; +Cc: 49315
Hey Maxim,
> + "Try to find the body of the procedure defined inline by EXPRESSION.
> +If it was found, call EXPRESSION with its body. If it wasn't, call
^
FOUND
> + (`(,(or 'let 'let*) . ,_)
> + (find-procedure-body (car (last-pair expression)) found
> + #:not-found not-found))
You can use "last" from (srfi srfi-1) here. What's the point of
stripping the let clause by the way?
> + (list (make-warning package
> + ;; TRANSLATORS: 'modify-phases' is a Scheme syntax
> + ;; and should not be translated.
> + (G_ "incorrect call to ‘modify-phases’")
> + #:field 'arguments)))
Maybe you could return a plain object here.
> + (list (make-warning package
> + ;; TRANSLATORS: See ‘modify-phases’ in the manual.
> + (G_ "invalid phase clause")
> + #:field 'arguments)))
and here.
Thanks,
Mathieu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
2021-07-06 17:29 ` Mathieu Othacehe
@ 2021-07-06 20:38 ` Maxime Devos
2021-07-07 9:12 ` bug#49315: " Mathieu Othacehe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maxime Devos @ 2021-07-06 20:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mathieu Othacehe; +Cc: 49315
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4212 bytes --]
Mathieu Othacehe schreef op di 06-07-2021 om 19:29 [+0200]:
> Hey Maxime,
>
> > + "Try to find the body of the procedure defined inline by EXPRESSION.
> > +If it was found, call EXPRESSION with its body. If it wasn't, call
> ^
> FOUND
>
> > + (`(,(or 'let 'let*) . ,_)
> > + (find-procedure-body (car (last-pair expression)) found
> > + #:not-found not-found))
>
> You can use "last" from (srfi srfi-1) here.
No, I can't -- unless a backtrace in case of invalid code is acceptable.
The problem is that the procedure 'last' expects its argument to be a list.
E.g., try from a REPL:
scheme@(guile-user)> ((@ (srfi srfi-1) last) '("a" . 0))
$1 = 0
... wait, why didn't this raise an exception?
Looking at the definition of 'last' in (srfi srfi-1) in guile, I see
(define (last pair)
"Return the last element of the non-empty, finite list PAIR."
(car (last-pair pair)))
So, you're correct that "last" from (srfi srfi-1) can be used here,
but this still seems rather fragile to me and an implementation detail
of (srfi srfi-1).
> What's the point of stripping the let clause by the way?
Because 'find-procedure-body' is supposed to find the body of the procedure,
but sometimes the lambda is wrapped in a 'let'. (I don't have an example
currently in mind, but I've definitely seen things like
(modify-phases %standard-phases
(replace 'something
(let ((three (+ 1 2))
(lambda _
(format #t "~a~%" tree)))))
in package definitions). You could ask, why do we need to extract the
procedure body, can't we just pass the whole expression as-is to
'check-procedure-body'?
That's a possiblity, but would lead to some false negatives: consider the
following phases definition:
(modify-phases %standard-phases
(replace 'check
(let ((three (+ 1 2)))
(lambda* (#:key tests? #:allow-other-keys)
(invoke "stuff" (number->string bla-bla))))))
In this case, the parameter tests? is ignored, even though the symbol 'tests?'
appears in the expression. So we shouldn't look at the parameter.
--- wait, this is a patch review for the 'wrapper-inputs' linter, not the
'optional-tests' linter! Indeed, for the 'wrapper-inputs' linter, stripping
the 'let' (or 'let*') is pointless. It might even lead to false negatives!
Consider the case
(add-after 'install 'wrap
(let ((wrap (lambda (x) (wrap-program x [...]))))
(lambda _
(wrap "stuff")
(wrap "other-stuff"))))
That usage should ideally be detected by 'wrap-program'. But as no
current package definition seems to do such a thing, and using
'find-procedure-body' seems marginally ‘cleaner’ to me (YMMV?),
I would use 'find-procedure-body' anyways.
> > + (list (make-warning package
> > + ;; TRANSLATORS: 'modify-phases' is a Scheme syntax
> > + ;; and should not be translated.
> > + (G_ "incorrect call to ‘modify-phases’")
> > + #:field 'arguments)))
>
> Maybe you could return a plain object here.
Yes, but then
(define* (find-phase-deltas package found
#:key (not-found (const '()))
(bogus (cut report-bogus-phase-deltas package <>)))
would need to become
(define* (find-phase-deltas package found
#:key (not-found (const '()))
(bogus (lambda (bogus-deltas)
(list (report-bogus-deltas package bogus-deltas)))))
which is rather verbose. (The 'bogus-deltas' argument could be dropped I suppose?
But 'find-phase-deltas' is supposed to be generic, such that its callers can have
easy access to the bogus (dotted) list of phases ...)
> > + (list (make-warning package
> > + ;; TRANSLATORS: See ‘modify-phases’ in the manual.
> > + (G_ "invalid phase clause")
> > + #:field 'arguments)))
>
> and here.
Likewise.
Greetings,
Maxime.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* bug#49315: [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
2021-07-06 20:38 ` Maxime Devos
@ 2021-07-07 9:12 ` Mathieu Othacehe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Othacehe @ 2021-07-07 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maxime Devos; +Cc: 49315-done
Hey,
> That usage should ideally be detected by 'wrap-program'. But as no
> current package definition seems to do such a thing, and using
> 'find-procedure-body' seems marginally ‘cleaner’ to me (YMMV?),
> I would use 'find-procedure-body' anyways.
OK, seems fair. I just edited the first patch to use "last" that has the
benefit of hiding a "car" call and wrapped a long line.
Pushed on master.
Thanks,
Mathieu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
2021-07-01 11:39 [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input Maxime Devos
2021-07-06 17:29 ` Mathieu Othacehe
@ 2021-07-06 17:43 ` Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 20:51 ` Maxime Devos
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mathieu Othacehe @ 2021-07-06 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maxime Devos; +Cc: 49315
> When using 'wrap-program', "bash" (or "bash-minimal") should be
> in inputs. Otherwise, when cross-compiling, 'wrap-program' will use
> a native bash instead of the cross bash and the 'patch-shebangs' won't
> be able to correct this.
Nice one! Seems to work fine, and as most packages that use wrap-program
are broken in that aspect, that's a welcomed addition.
Sorry for misspelling your first name in my last email.
Thanks,
Mathieu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
2021-07-06 17:43 ` [bug#49315] " Mathieu Othacehe
@ 2021-07-06 20:51 ` Maxime Devos
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maxime Devos @ 2021-07-06 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mathieu Othacehe; +Cc: 49315
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 974 bytes --]
Mathieu Othacehe schreef op di 06-07-2021 om 19:43 [+0200]:
> > When using 'wrap-program', "bash" (or "bash-minimal") should be
> > in inputs. Otherwise, when cross-compiling, 'wrap-program' will use
> > a native bash instead of the cross bash and the 'patch-shebangs' won't
> > be able to correct this.
>
> Nice one! Seems to work fine, and as most packages that use wrap-program
> are broken in that aspect, that's a welcomed addition.
Thanks! I sent a patch series lately adding "bash-minimal" to 'inputs'
when 'wrap-program' is used, using this linter to identify relevant cases.
Ludo would merge it (on core-updates, after some other things have been fixed
there).
I noticed 'qt-build-system' uses 'wrap-program' in its 'qt-wrap'
phase, so I've sent a patch to add 'bash-minimal' to the bag of 'qt-build-system'
when cross-compiling. That should largely take care of the 'wrap-program'
cross-compilation issues, I hope!
Greetings,
Maxime.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-07-07 9:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-07-01 11:39 [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input Maxime Devos
2021-07-06 17:29 ` Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 20:38 ` Maxime Devos
2021-07-07 9:12 ` bug#49315: " Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 17:43 ` [bug#49315] " Mathieu Othacehe
2021-07-06 20:51 ` Maxime Devos
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.