[bug#60009,09/18] gnu: sqlite-next: Update to 3.40.0.

* gnu/packages/sqlite.scm (sqlite-next): Update to 3.40.0.
---
 gnu/packages/sqlite.scm | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Hi Ricardo,

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 at 15:27, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
> * gnu/packages/sqlite.scm (sqlite-next): Update to 3.40.0.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/sqlite.scm | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm b/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
> index 71cc923a3a..930dc8041d 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 Ben Woodcroft <donttrustben@gmail.com>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 David Craven <david@craven.ch>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 Marius Bakke <marius@gnu.org>
> -;;; Copyright © 2017 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
> +;;; Copyright © 2017, 2022 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2017 Jelle Licht <jlicht@fsfe.org>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2018 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2018 Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com>

This patch does not seem to update sqlite-next. :-)


Cheers,
simon

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Ricardo,
>
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 at 15:27, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>> * gnu/packages/sqlite.scm (sqlite-next): Update to 3.40.0.
>> ---
>>  gnu/packages/sqlite.scm | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm b/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
>> index 71cc923a3a..930dc8041d 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/sqlite.scm
>> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 Ben Woodcroft <donttrustben@gmail.com>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 David Craven <david@craven.ch>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 Marius Bakke <marius@gnu.org>
>> -;;; Copyright © 2017 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
>> +;;; Copyright © 2017, 2022 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2017 Jelle Licht <jlicht@fsfe.org>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2018 Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2018 Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com>
>
> This patch does not seem to update sqlite-next. :-)

Yes, when I rebased on top of commit 50b36f688b43c219dc64a1ce7f6d5e08c0025089
my change disappeared.  That commit did not update python-apsw, which is
sensitive to the version of sqlite-next.

I wish we could express these dependencies as constraints so that people
know what other packages to pay attention to when updating something.

Hi,

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 at 21:13, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

> Yes, when I rebased on top of commit 50b36f688b43c219dc64a1ce7f6d5e08c0025089
> my change disappeared.  That commit did not update python-apsw, which is
> sensitive to the version of sqlite-next.

Why not dropping this patch "gnu: sqlite-next: Update to 3.40.0." if
it is already merged?

Despite the comment for python-aspw,

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(inputs (list sqlite-next))         ;SQLite 3.39 required.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

it builds fine with 3.40 [1].  Collateral damage avoided. :-)

1: http://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/224759/details


> I wish we could express these dependencies as constraints so that people
> know what other packages to pay attention to when updating something.

I totally agree!  Maybe the QA [2] will help; well, the QA service
seems having troubles with for 60009 [2] for unexpected reasons.
Today, the update looks like lottery. :-)  Sometime, a trivial update
here and then an unexpected break overthere.

2: https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/60009

Cheers,
simon

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 at 21:13, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes, when I rebased on top of commit 50b36f688b43c219dc64a1ce7f6d5e08c0025089
>> my change disappeared.  That commit did not update python-apsw, which is
>> sensitive to the version of sqlite-next.
>
> Why not dropping this patch "gnu: sqlite-next: Update to 3.40.0." if
> it is already merged?

Only because I didn’t notice before sending off the patch set ;)
I’ll drop it before merging the patches.

> Despite the comment for python-aspw,
>
> (inputs (list sqlite-next))         ;SQLite 3.39 required.
>
> it builds fine with 3.40 [1].  Collateral damage avoided. :-)
>
> 1: http://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/224759/details

Good good.  Could be that the difference between 3.39 and 3.40 is just
not big enough to matter.  What does matter is that it’s not just
“sqlite” but something more recent.

>> I wish we could express these dependencies as constraints so that people
>> know what other packages to pay attention to when updating something.
>
> I totally agree!  Maybe the QA [2] will help; well, the QA service
> seems having troubles with for 60009 [2] for unexpected reasons.
> Today, the update looks like lottery. :-)  Sometime, a trivial update
> here and then an unexpected break overthere.
>
> 2: https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/60009

I’ve been refreshing this page since I submitted the patch set; good to
know that the problems here are unexpected.

I have previously built packages with these changes on berlin, so there
are substitutes already.  I’ll go ahead and merge it if you have no
objections.

Thank you for the review!

Hi,

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 00:06, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

> I have previously built packages with these changes on berlin, so there
> are substitutes already.  I’ll go ahead and merge it if you have no
> objections.

No objection.  I have not built all the patch set neither but the series LGTM.

Please go ahead. :-)

Cheers,
simon

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 00:06, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>
>> I have previously built packages with these changes on berlin, so there
>> are substitutes already.  I’ll go ahead and merge it if you have no
>> objections.
>
> No objection.  I have not built all the patch set neither but the series LGTM.
>
> Please go ahead. :-)

Thanks!  Merged.