| Message ID | eac2dee14619f97f9064c3c87c37f3f2f806b8dc.1663608658.git.trev@trevdev.ca |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#57757] gnu: Add sbcl-stumpwm-pamixer | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
| cbaines/git-branch | success | View Git branch |
| cbaines/applying patch | success | View Laminar job |
| cbaines/issue | success | View issue |
On 19-09-2022 19:47, Trevor Richards wrote: > + (arguments > + `(#:asd-systems '(:pamixer) > + #:phases > + ,#~(modify-phases %standard-phases > + (add-after 'unpack 'patch-pamixer > + (lambda _ > + (substitute* "pamixer.lisp" > + (("\"pamixer \"") > + (string-append > + "\"" #$pamixer "/bin/pamixer \"")))))))) To support --with-input transformations, you can't do #$input, you have to do #$(this-package-input "pamixer") instead -- or better, don't depend on input labels, by using (search-input-file inputs "bin/pamixer") instead. Greetings, Maxime.
Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes: > On 19-09-2022 19:47, Trevor Richards wrote: >> + (arguments >> + `(#:asd-systems '(:pamixer) >> + #:phases >> + ,#~(modify-phases %standard-phases >> + (add-after 'unpack 'patch-pamixer >> + (lambda _ >> + (substitute* "pamixer.lisp" >> + (("\"pamixer \"") >> + (string-append >> + "\"" #$pamixer "/bin/pamixer \"")))))))) > > To support --with-input transformations, you can't do #$input, you have > to do #$(this-package-input "pamixer") instead -- or better, don't > depend on input labels, by using (search-input-file inputs > "bin/pamixer") instead. > Thanks for the feedback. It's hard to tell when a gexp is appropriate and where it's not, or how to properly evaluate it all at the right time. The current patch builds. Is this problematic in the sense that it's using some reference to #$pamixer that is not actually a part of the build environment? Note I had to use a quasiqote and unquote for the `gexp` to work. Transforming the arguments into a list so I would not have to do this breaks the #:asd-systems keyword value somehow. When I observe the source code it's kinda all over the place when it comes to using gexps in some way or when not to. I will patch this again and document a note about this but if there's any clarifying documentation I would happily read it. Apologies in advance if I have missed existing documentation.
On 19-09-2022 20:22, Trev wrote: > Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes: > >> On 19-09-2022 19:47, Trevor Richards wrote: >>> + (arguments >>> + `(#:asd-systems '(:pamixer) >>> + #:phases >>> + ,#~(modify-phases %standard-phases >>> + (add-after 'unpack 'patch-pamixer >>> + (lambda _ >>> + (substitute* "pamixer.lisp" >>> + (("\"pamixer \"") >>> + (string-append >>> + "\"" #$pamixer "/bin/pamixer \"")))))))) >> >> To support --with-input transformations, you can't do #$input, you have >> to do #$(this-package-input "pamixer") instead -- or better, don't >> depend on input labels, by using (search-input-file inputs >> "bin/pamixer") instead. >> > > Thanks for the feedback. It's hard to tell when a gexp is appropriate > and where it's not, or how to properly evaluate it all at the right > time. The current patch builds. Is this problematic in the sense that > it's using some reference to #$pamixer that is not actually a part of > the build environment? It is inappropriate in the sense that '--with-input' rewrites the 'inputs', 'native-inputs' and 'propagated-inputs' fields, but not the contents of the G-exp. > Note I had to use a quasiqote and unquote for the `gexp` to work. > Transforming the arguments into a list so I would not have to do this > breaks the #:asd-systems keyword value somehow. How about: (arguments (list #:asd-systems ''(:pa-mixers) #:phases #~(modify-phases [...]))) (i.e., you are removing a layer of quoting by turning the quasiquote into a quote, so it needs to be readded for the #:asd-systems). > > When I observe the source code it's kinda all over the place when it > comes to using gexps in some way or when not to. > > I will patch this again and document a note about this but if there's > any clarifying documentation I would happily read it. Apologies in > advance if I have missed existing documentation. I'm not aware of any, though I'd like to note that G-exps are new-ish and hence the 'all over the place' is more "guix style doesn't know how to transform this kind of old thing yet" than "we chose for s-exps instead of G-exps". Greetings, Maxime.
Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes: > On 19-09-2022 20:22, Trev wrote: >> Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes: >> >>> On 19-09-2022 19:47, Trevor Richards wrote: >>>> + (arguments >>>> + `(#:asd-systems '(:pamixer) >>>> + #:phases >>>> + ,#~(modify-phases %standard-phases >>>> + (add-after 'unpack 'patch-pamixer >>>> + (lambda _ >>>> + (substitute* "pamixer.lisp" >>>> + (("\"pamixer \"") >>>> + (string-append >>>> + "\"" #$pamixer "/bin/pamixer \"")))))))) >>> >>> To support --with-input transformations, you can't do #$input, you have >>> to do #$(this-package-input "pamixer") instead -- or better, don't >>> depend on input labels, by using (search-input-file inputs >>> "bin/pamixer") instead. >>> >> >> Thanks for the feedback. It's hard to tell when a gexp is appropriate >> and where it's not, or how to properly evaluate it all at the right >> time. The current patch builds. Is this problematic in the sense that >> it's using some reference to #$pamixer that is not actually a part of >> the build environment? > > It is inappropriate in the sense that '--with-input' rewrites the > 'inputs', 'native-inputs' and 'propagated-inputs' fields, but not the > contents of the G-exp. > I see. I am not yet familiar with the --with-input flag. I will explore this feature, thank you. >> Note I had to use a quasiqote and unquote for the `gexp` to work. >> Transforming the arguments into a list so I would not have to do this >> breaks the #:asd-systems keyword value somehow. > > How about: > > (arguments > (list #:asd-systems ''(:pa-mixers) > #:phases > #~(modify-phases [...]))) > > (i.e., you are removing a layer of quoting by turning the quasiquote > into a quote, so it needs to be readded for the #:asd-systems). > I see a double-quote there with ~''(:pamixer)~ - which is not something I have ever tried to do before. Is this a typo? I had tried (list #:asd-systems '(:pamixer) #:phases #~([...])) and the build failed due '(:pamixer) somehow not returning anything from a (car) function. Sometimes errors elsewhere cause nebulous tracebacks. I will try this again. >> >> When I observe the source code it's kinda all over the place when it >> comes to using gexps in some way or when not to. >> >> I will patch this again and document a note about this but if there's >> any clarifying documentation I would happily read it. Apologies in >> advance if I have missed existing documentation. > > I'm not aware of any, though I'd like to note that G-exps are new-ish > and hence the 'all over the place' is more "guix style doesn't know how > to transform this kind of old thing yet" than "we chose for s-exps > instead of G-exps". I like the new way of using gexps. They are more terse than needing to assoc reference inputs/outputs. The thought of as slow transition happening had occured to me. I appreciate your insight.
On 19-09-2022 23:34, Trev wrote: >> (arguments >> (list #:asd-systems ''(:pa-mixers) >> #:phases >> #~(modify-phases [...]))) >> >> (i.e., you are removing a layer of quoting by turning the quasiquote >> into a quote, so it needs to be readded for the #:asd-systems). >> > I see a double-quote there with ~''(:pamixer)~ - which is not something > I have ever tried to do before. Is this a typo? No, it's intentional -- if you do '(:pa-mixers), the code (:pa-mixers) is passed to the builder, but that can't work, as :pa-mixers is undefined (or a keyword, depending on how the Guile reader is configured). If you do ''(:pa-mixers), the code '(:pa-mixers) is passed to the builder, as intended. If you change ''(:pa-mixers) to '(pa-mixers), then I expect you'll get a build failure. Greetings, Maxime.
Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes: > On 19-09-2022 23:34, Trev wrote: >>> (arguments >>> (list #:asd-systems ''(:pa-mixers) >>> #:phases >>> #~(modify-phases [...]))) >>> >>> (i.e., you are removing a layer of quoting by turning the quasiquote >>> into a quote, so it needs to be readded for the #:asd-systems). >>> >> I see a double-quote there with ~''(:pamixer)~ - which is not something >> I have ever tried to do before. Is this a typo? > > No, it's intentional -- if you do '(:pa-mixers), the code (:pa-mixers) > is passed to the builder, but that can't work, as :pa-mixers is > undefined (or a keyword, depending on how the Guile reader is > configured). If you do ''(:pa-mixers), the code '(:pa-mixers) is passed > to the builder, as intended. > > If you change ''(:pa-mixers) to '(pa-mixers), then I expect you'll get a > build failure. > I feel a little silly because after I asked my question I went ahead and ran a ripgrep on the project root for a pattern of ''( and found numerous occurences of it. Of course it failed without the double quote. Thanks for all of your helpful feedback. I have made notes so that I can recall these concepts later.
diff --git a/gnu/packages/wm.scm b/gnu/packages/wm.scm index 451dfce516..dd1e81544f 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/wm.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/wm.scm @@ -1986,6 +1986,40 @@ (define-public stumpish (description "This package provides a StumpWM interactive shell.") (license (list license:gpl2+ license:gpl3+ license:bsd-2)))) +(define-public sbcl-stumpwm-pamixer + (let ((commit "aa820533c80ea1af5a0e107cea25eaf34e69dc24") + (revision "1")) + (package + (name "sbcl-stumpwm-pamixer") + (version (git-version "0.1.1" revision commit)) + (source (origin + (method git-fetch) + (uri (git-reference + (url "https://github.com/Junker/stumpwm-pamixer") + (commit commit))) + (file-name (git-file-name name version)) + (sha256 + (base32 + "0djcrr16bx40l7b60d4j507vk5l42fdgmjpgrnk86z1ba8wlqim8")))) + (inputs (list `(,stumpwm "lib") + pamixer)) + (build-system asdf-build-system/sbcl) + (arguments + `(#:asd-systems '(:pamixer) + #:phases + ,#~(modify-phases %standard-phases + (add-after 'unpack 'patch-pamixer + (lambda _ + (substitute* "pamixer.lisp" + (("\"pamixer \"") + (string-append + "\"" #$pamixer "/bin/pamixer \"")))))))) + (home-page "https://github.com/Junker/stumpwm-pamixer") + (synopsis "StumpWM Pamixer Module") + (description "Minimalistic Pulseaudio volume and microphone control +module for StumpWM.") + (license license:gpl3)))) + (define-public sbcl-stumpwm+slynk (deprecated-package "sbcl-stumpwm-with-slynk" stumpwm+slynk))