Jookia <166...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 07:49:48PM +0200, Nils Gillmann wrote: >> >> +;; We provide SVN in addition to the older 0.10.1 version, >> >> +;; protocol and API compatibility will be broken when GNUnet bug #4165 >> >> +;; is fixed. >> >> +(define-public gnunet-svn >> >> + (package >> >> + (name "gnunet-svn") >> >> + (version "0.10.1.svn36926") >> >> + (source >> >> + (origin >> >> + (method svn-fetch) >> >> + (uri (svn-reference >> >> + (url "https://gnunet.org/svn/gnunet/") >> >> + (revision 36926))) >> > >> > Are SVN identifiers really that short, or is there a longer version that >> > we should use, as for Git? >> >> I have no idea, I thought this was what we used for svn. >> Most of the -svn is done by Jookia, i just fixed the way they >> were arranged, named, described and some other fixes. > > Apologies for not being on IRC, I'm currently away from my main machine so I"m > left with a decaying Arch Linux install that doesn't have an OpenVPN > container. > > Yes, SVN identifiers are really that short- they're the count of commits done > to > the centralized repository. The reason this isn't a thing in Git is because of > decentralization, there'd be no way to keep a monotonic revision number with > the > amount of branches and private repositories. > >> >> + (arguments >> >> + '(#:configure-flags >> >> + (list (string-append "--with-nssdir=" %output "/lib")) >> > >> > It needs help referring to its own output? >> >> Refer to Jookia, will ping Jookia later about this thread.
I try a build without this, compare it to my own svn build on gentoo and see if it's necessary. >> >> >> + #:parallel-tests? #f >> >> + ;; test_gnunet_service_arm fails; reported upstream >> >> + #:tests? #f >> > >> > Okay, is it easy to disable just the failing test? Also, can you include >> > a link to the upstream bug report in this comment? >> >> I don't know which bugreport this refers to, waiting for comment >> by Jookia. > > So both of these flags are present in the original gnunet package. Perhaps > it'd > be worth seeing if we can remove them in the case they're fied upstream. Thanks. I do appropriate changes later today and test build and run the packages. >> Why? gnunet-$version is the stable release, gnunet-svn is the svn >> release. Both should carry information visible to users on why >> there are different packages. > > I'd have to agree with keeping this information, especially since the response > to many GNUnet problems is to "use the SVN version.", which is exactly what > people will find here. It's also useful Guix runs on foreign distributions so > people won't have to spend headaches getting it compiled. > > Overall good patches, I'm glad there's a lot of interest and discussion here. > Nothing seems off to me, but those are famous last words and I haven't > reviewed > the split patches yet, I'll put it on my 'I'll review it this week' list and > come back next month sometime with replies if it's not merged. > >> -- >> ng >> personal contact: http://krosos.sdf.org >> EDN: https://wiki.c3d2.de/EDN > > Jookia. > > -- ng personal contact: http://krosos.sdf.org EDN: https://wiki.c3d2.de/EDN