Message ID | 1b98ce69769d0366503c7fb7f956da7fa9ec5132.camel@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [bug#57704,v3] guix: Filter unspecified inputs when sanitizing. | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
cbaines/git-branch | success | View Git branch |
cbaines/applying patch | success | |
cbaines/issue | success | View issue |
cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
cbaines/git-branch | success | View Git branch |
cbaines/applying patch | success | View Laminar job |
cbaines/issue | success | View issue |
> Am Samstag, dem 10.09.2022 um 02:33 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos: >> The docstring is nice, but with documentation, I meant the manual, >> presumably in ‘(guix)package Reference’, maybe also in the packaging >> tutorial in the cookbook. > I don't see the current practice documented, so I think we're actually > good on this front. That sounds bad to me -- the undocumented surface should be decreased, not increased. Also, it is actually documented a little: ‘inputs’ (default: ‘'()’) ‘native-inputs’ (default: ‘'()’) ‘propagated-inputs’ (default: ‘'()’) These fields list dependencies of the package. Each element of these lists is either a package, origin, or other “file-like object” (*note G-Expressions::); [...] #false (or, in this case, *unspecified*) is neither a package, origin or other file-like object. Maybe you can add that #false is also allowed but ignored? On 10-09-2022 09:41, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote: > inputs) > - (else (map add-input-label inputs)))) > + (else (filter-map (lambda (input) > + (if (unspecified? input) #f > + (add-input-label input))) > + inputs)))) (when cond ...) / (unless cond ...) returning *unspecified* when (not cond)/cond is an implementation detail: * The return values(s) when (not cond)/cond is not documented in (guile)Conditionals * maybe: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=56799#17 There is an interest in letting it return zero values instead of *unspecified*, see e.g. https://scheme-reports.scheme-reports.narkive.com/QSQtJSAh/unspecified-values and a ‘bug’ on bugs.gnu.org I cannot find anymore about actually doing this change. By assuming that when/unless returns *unspecified* here, an additional backwards-compatibility concern is introduced. As such, I don't think relying on this to be a good idea. Alternative proposal: instead of (when cond package), maybe (and cond package)? Greetings, Maxime
diff --git a/guix/packages.scm b/guix/packages.scm index 94e464cd01..0975002c13 100644 --- a/guix/packages.scm +++ b/guix/packages.scm @@ -429,12 +429,15 @@ (define %cuirass-supported-systems (define-inlinable (sanitize-inputs inputs) "Sanitize INPUTS by turning it into a list of name/package tuples if it's -not already the case." +not already the case and removing unspecified inputs." (cond ((null? inputs) inputs) ((and (pair? (car inputs)) (string? (caar inputs))) inputs) - (else (map add-input-label inputs)))) + (else (filter-map (lambda (input) + (if (unspecified? input) #f + (add-input-label input))) + inputs)))) (define-syntax current-location-vector (lambda (s)