Great job! Patches pushed (with one change) On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:44:43PM +0100, zimoun wrote: > Hi Efraim, > > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 at 14:47, Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> wrote: > > > It turns out we didn't expose julia-package-dependencies in the > > julia-build-system, making the created Package.toml incomplete. This > > corrects the omission and fixes the one package where it is manually > > added. > > All LGTM. But I take this opportunity to uniform, as discussed: > > It's definitely the new pattern we're using now. I suppose it's > not really necessary here, but having more instances of it > throughout the codebase also makes it easier to search for > examples when others are looking to use or modify gexps. > > <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/53656#4-lineno49> > > The first patch of the series uses G-exps. Note that it does not imply > any rebuild. > > The Julia build system is adapted for the new > 'julia-package-dependencies' and so it requires the minor tweak to > default with ''() instead of #f; otherwise it crashes for some packages. > > Since we are at it, I fix a minor typo of how Julia uses --procs. Other > said, currently "guix build julia-media -c 0" works but not "guix build > julia-media -c 1" which crashes. > > Because the build system modifications imply a full Julia rebuild, let > take the opportunity to remove the trailing #t. It is done package per > package because each modified package need a rebuild so it eases to > follow, IMHO. They can be squashed otherwise. > > > Cheers, > simon -- Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---