[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#43578] [PATCH 0/4] Rewriting implicit inputs with 'package-input-re
From: |
zimoun |
Subject: |
[bug#43578] [PATCH 0/4] Rewriting implicit inputs with 'package-input-rewriting' & co. |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Sep 2020 00:38:03 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Ludo,
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 18:12, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> Concretely, the following commands had no effect thus far:
>
> guix build python-itsdangerous --with-input=python=python2
> guix build hello --with-input=gcc=gcc-toolchain@10
>
> In both cases, this is because the input we want to change is
> an implicit input. This patch set fixes that, and it fixes
> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/42156> as a side effect.
Maybe I am doing wrong and I miss something.
For example, I want to build the package ’emacs-helm’ –which does not
(directly) depends on the package ’emacs’– using the package
’emacs-next’ (changing the Emacs VM from 27 to 28 in this case).
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ ./pre-inst-env guix build emacs emacs-next
/gnu/store/7kr0pg7gwhc31q4iq5vbnm5n99srhp84-emacs-next-28.0.50.1-0.2ea3466
/gnu/store/q3c6y4ccj3li5gfdcbyz24n466fnipp1-emacs-27.1
$ cat /tmp/manif.scm
(specifications->manifest '("emacs-helm"))
$ ./pre-inst-env guix build -m /tmp/manif.scm
/gnu/store/ka9lph0hpzaky0sa52zf09469apkhb68-emacs-helm-3.6.5
$ ./pre-inst-env guix build -m /tmp/manif.scm --with-input=emacs=emacs-next
/gnu/store/ka9lph0hpzaky0sa52zf09469apkhb68-emacs-helm-3.6.5
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
I miss why the hash is the same. I was expecting a different one, as
with your ’hello’ example (that I reproduce exactly). What do I miss?
Note it is the same with:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ ./pre-inst-env guix build emacs-helm --with-input=emacs=emacs-next
/gnu/store/ka9lph0hpzaky0sa52zf09469apkhb68-emacs-helm-3.6.5
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Well, I am trying to provide an example to [1] because your patch set
supersedes it, somehow.
[1] <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/41732#7>
(I have not yet tried the build transformation at the manifest level.)
All the best,
simon