[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Order of manifest and overlapping binaries
From: |
Greg Hogan |
Subject: |
Re: Order of manifest and overlapping binaries |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:18:30 -0400 |
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 4:55 PM Csepp <raingloom@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
> Greg Hogan <code@greghogan.com> writes:
>
> > I could not find documentation on this circumstance or how to resolve.
> > Both 'parallel' and 'moreutils' produce a 'bin/parallel' and only one
> > can go in the $GUIX_PROFILE.
> >
> > Creating a container, the latter package overshadows the former
> > package, as below. Unclear if this is consistent. In my manifest the
> > former package overshadows the latter (I'd prefer to have parallel's
> > parallel, but by default I have sorted the listing alphabetically). Is
> > there a better way to fix this?
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> > $ guix shell --container moreutils parallel which coreutils
> > [env]$ readlink -f `which parallel`
> > /gnu/store/xd9kbadmrrbpkjs9vl1v9rhgayfxwgbc-parallel-20230422/bin/parallel
> >
> > guix shell --container parallel moreutils which coreutils
> > [env]$ readlink -f $(which parallel)
> > /gnu/store/60zdm9zm0nqm5d97vs30sf4plb2ib5p9-moreutils-0.67/bin/parallel
> > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> >
> >
> > This is operating from a recent guix pull:
> >
> > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> > $ guix describe
> > Generation 44 May 11 2023 17:02:53 (current)
> > guix d6f6b57
> > repository URL: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
> > branch: master
> > commit: d6f6b57766e95d2fa8af63d4460a2b303ca4d867
> > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> You could create a package that just copies the contents of moreutils
> to $output, but renames some files, then include the resulting package
> in your manifest. If moreutils is not propagated from any other
> package, then you don't even have to do an input rewrite.
I'm still cutting my teeth on Scheme, and this looks like a simple
error, but the following from my manifest results in the error below.
The function accepts a package to inherit from and a list of files to
rename by appending the package name. This works if I change to pass
in a single string and create the list within the for-each argument.
(define (rename-files parent-package files)
(package/inherit parent-package
(arguments
(substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments parent-package)
((#:phases phases #~%standard-phases)
#~(modify-phases #$phases
(add-after 'install 'rename-files
(lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
(let ((out #$output) (name #$(package-name parent-package)))
(for-each
(lambda (file)
(rename-file (string-append out "/" file)
(string-append out "/" file "-" name)))
#$files))))))))))
(define moreutils-decollide
(rename-files moreutils (list "bin/parallel")))
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
starting phase `rename-files'
error: in phase 'rename-files': uncaught exception:
wrong-type-arg #f "Wrong type to apply: ~S" ("bin/parallel") ("bin/parallel")
phase `rename-files' failed after 0.0 seconds
Backtrace:
9 (primitive-load "/gnu/store/qrj9l194a552vpg2234xx55k76j…")
In guix/build/gnu-build-system.scm:
908:2 8 (gnu-build #:source _ #:outputs _ #:inputs _ #:phases . #)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
1752:10 7 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
In srfi/srfi-1.scm:
634:9 6 (for-each #<procedure 7ffff5b0b140 at guix/build/gnu-b…> …)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
1752:10 5 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ # _)
In guix/build/gnu-build-system.scm:
929:23 4 (_)
In ice-9/eval.scm:
159:9 3 (_ #(#(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7ffff77f7c80>) (#)) …))
159:9 2 (_ _)
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
1685:16 1 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)
1685:16 0 (raise-exception _ #:continuable? _)
ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception:
Wrong type to apply: "bin/parallel"
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
- Re: Order of manifest and overlapping binaries,
Greg Hogan <=