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

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

bug#49315: closed ([PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bas


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#49315: closed ([PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.)
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2021 09:13:02 +0000

Your message dated Wed, 07 Jul 2021 11:12:33 +0200
with message-id <87sg0q4hdq.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without 
a "bash" input.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #49315,
regarding [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
49315: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=49315
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input. Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 13:39:53 +0200 User-agent: Evolution 3.34.2
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: 0001-lint-Define-some-procedures-for-analysing-code-in-ph.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: 0002-lint-Lint-usages-of-wrap-program-without-a-bash-inpu.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: [bug#49315] [PATCH]: Lint usages of 'wrap-program' without a "bash" input. Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2021 11:12:33 +0200 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
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


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

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