guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: 01/01: gnu: wxmaxima: Update to 17.05.0.


From: Kei Kebreau
Subject: Re: 01/01: gnu: wxmaxima: Update to 17.05.0.
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2017 18:07:18 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux)

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Kei Kebreau) writes:
>
>> kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master
>> in repository guix.
>>
>> commit 5143517c9969d17b48cbb60e1103633bc0cfb430
>> Author: Kei Kebreau <address@hidden>
>> Date:   Fri Jul 7 22:58:27 2017 -0400
>>
>>     gnu: wxmaxima: Update to 17.05.0.
>>     
>>     * gnu/packages/maths.scm (wxmaxima): Update to 17.05.0.
>>     [source]: Update URL and add file-name.
>>     [native-inputs]: Add autoconf, automake and gettext-minimal.
>>     [arguments]: Add 'autoconf' phase.
>
> [...]
>
>> @@ -2172,6 +2176,10 @@ point numbers.")
>>         ("shared-mime-info" ,shared-mime-info)))
>>      (arguments
>>       `(#:phases (modify-phases %standard-phases
>> +                  (add-before
>> +                   'configure 'autoconf
>> +                   (lambda _
>> +                     (zero? (system* "./bootstrap"))))
>
> In general, autoconf-style phases like this should be put after the
> 'unpack' phase, not before the 'configure' phase.  The reason is that on
> some platforms (e.g. mips64el-linux), the 'patch-usr-bin-file' phase
> needs to be able to operate on the generated configure script.
>
> When you move the phase earlier, you may then find that you need to
> launch the 'bootstrap' script differently, because its shebang will not
> be correct.  That's because it will now be run before the
> 'patch-source-shebangs' phase.
>
> So, the way we normally do this is to run something like:
>
>   (zero? (system* "sh" "bootstrap"))
>
> Grepping for "add-before 'configure" reveals that there are now a rather
> large number of instances of this problem.  Oh well.
>
>        Mark

I see. Thank you for the correction.

Do you consider it worth going through the package code and patching
this problem specifically or should it be corrected gradually while
making other changes?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

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