[bug#70380,v4,2/6] maint: Support `make doc-po-update' from tarball.

* build-aux/xgettext.scm: Move setting of environment variables to shell
header.
(main): Use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH as fallback for timestamp.  This fixes running
from a tarball.
* Makefile.am (EXTRA_DIST): Add it.

Change-Id: Ic487587b22495868fd2a21545a13dc9e3458299c
---
 Makefile.am            |  1 +
 build-aux/xgettext.scm | 10 +++++-----
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Hi Jan.  There is a typo in the 2/6 top commit message, where `make
doc-po-update' must be `make doc-pot-update' with a t.  Which I believe
is also what you meant when in your non-patch V4 0/6 response, you spoke
of update-po.

Also yet one more problem (perhaps) I’ve discovered that “info
doc/guix.info” now says:

This document describes GNU Guix version , a functional package

The version number is missing, but the official 1.4.0 tarball’s
doc/guix.info says:

This document describes GNU Guix version 1.4.0, a functional package

Could you fix this, too?  Or do I make a mistake and would a real
release display properly?


Otherwise, all LGTM now and again, thank you!

Regards,
Florian

pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) writes:

Hi Florian,

> Hi Jan.  There is a typo in the 2/6 top commit message, where `make
> doc-po-update' must be `make doc-pot-update' with a t.

Thanks, fixed.

> Which I believe is also what you meant when in your non-patch V4 0/6
> response, you spoke of update-po.

In V4 0/6 I was thinking about make -C po/{guix,packages} update-po,
but yeah.  Same difference I guess ;)

> Also yet one more problem (perhaps) I’ve discovered that “info
> doc/guix.info” now says:
>
> This document describes GNU Guix version , a functional package
[..]
> Could you fix this, too?  Or do I make a mistake and would a real
> release display properly?

If you can help me reproduce this problem, sure.  I tried several things
but haven't been able to reproduce it yet.  Every time I get

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
This document describes GNU Guix version 1.3.0.58022-1d8520, a
functional package management tool written for the GNU system.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

What recipe did you use?  I'm probably doing the same thing to test and
might well be missing something.

> Otherwise, all LGTM now and again, thank you!

Yay!

Greetings,
Janneke

Hi,

Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> writes:
> pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) writes:
>> Also yet one more problem (perhaps) I’ve discovered that “info
>> doc/guix.info” now says:
>>
>> This document describes GNU Guix version , a functional package
> [..]
>> Could you fix this, too?  Or do I make a mistake and would a real
>> release display properly?
>
> If you can help me reproduce this problem, sure.  I tried several things
> but haven't been able to reproduce it yet.  Every time I get
>
> This document describes GNU Guix version 1.3.0.58022-1d8520, a
> functional package management tool written for the GNU system.
>
> What recipe did you use?  I'm probably doing the same thing to test and
> might well be missing something.

From a “make dist”-generated tarball, I ran “./bootstrap”, “./configure
--sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var” and “make”.

From the 1.4.0 source tarball, this leads to “info doc/guix.info”
displaying 1.4.0, but not from a “make dist”-generated tarball.

Thank you for trying reproducing the error.

Regards,
Florian

pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) writes:

Hi Florian,

> Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> writes:
>> pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) writes:
>>> Also yet one more problem (perhaps) I’ve discovered that “info
>>> doc/guix.info” now says:
[..]
>> What recipe did you use?  I'm probably doing the same thing to test and
>> might well be missing something.
>
> From a “make dist”-generated tarball, I ran “./bootstrap”, “./configure
> --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var” and “make”.

Ah!  I said before that `git-version-gen' was broken when not run from a
tarball...but it turns out to work fine...as long as you distribute it ;)

I've added a patch to distribute it and that also fixes all the

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
sh: line 1: build-aux/git-version-gen: No such file or directory
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

noise.

> From the 1.4.0 source tarball, this leads to “info doc/guix.info”
> displaying 1.4.0, but not from a “make dist”-generated tarball.

Yeah, I can see that now.  AFAICS that was more of a "happy
coincidence".  We didn't distribute git-version-gen, so after running
./bootstrap, also in the 1.4.0 tarball, ./configure has

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
# Define the identity of the package.
 PACKAGE='guix'
 VERSION=''
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I cannot say that I completely understand why in 1.4.0 guix.info still
has a non-empty version after running make.  It must have something to
do with timestamp or dependency magic causing doc/version.texi not to be
regerenated, even after running ./bootstrap (although it depends on
configure

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$(srcdir)/doc/version.texi:  $(srcdir)/doc/stamp-vti
$(srcdir)/doc/stamp-vti: doc/guix.texi $(top_srcdir)/configure
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

which we just regenerated.  Oh well, we have a proper fix now.

Thanks a lot for your reviews!

Pushed to master as ba52975ea91af49e8e6a436438a578589a209ecc

Greetings,
Janneke