emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[debbugs-tracker] bug#31041: closed ([PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools.)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#31041: closed ([PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools.)
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 12:57:02 +0000

Your message dated Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:55:55 +0200
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: [bug#31041] [PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #31041,
regarding [PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
31041: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=31041
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools. Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 15:09:17 +0200 User-agent: mu4e 1.0; emacs 25.3.1
Dear Guix,

The attached patch would add perl-pathtools.  This package searches for
the “pwd” program in specific paths (ignoring the PATH environment
variable).  Because “pwd” is part of “coreutils”, it has a funny
dependency.

In the path I substitute the entry for “/bin/pwd” to the store path of
coreutils's “pwd”.

Is this the right way of packaging perl-pathtools?

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen

Attachment: 0001-gnu-Add-perl-pathtools.patch
Description: Text Data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: [bug#31041] [PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools. Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:55:55 +0200 User-agent: mu4e 1.0; emacs 25.3.1
Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> Roel Janssen <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> From a9adb8d30747afb47284baaca898261a012a1d03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Roel Janssen <address@hidden>
>> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:00:15 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add perl-pathtools.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/perl.scm (perl-pathtools): New variable.
>
> [...]
>
>> +    (license (package-license perl))))
>
> Please change this as discussed before.
>
> Otherwise LGTM!

I adjusted the license field, and pushed in b028a9830.

Thanks!

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen



--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]