Hi Alex, Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès (2017-06-30 11:35 +0200) wrote: [...] >>> Looks like this was removed in an attempt to improve performance over >>> NFS. The “scheme-files” procedure now includes a comment: >>> >>> ;; XXX: We don't recurse if we find a symlink. >>> >>> Would it not be better to fix this instead of adding support for special >>> syntax in GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH? >> >> Indeed, apologies for the breakage. >> >> I think the patch below fixes it. It incurs overhead only when a >> symlink is encountered, which is reasonable I think. >> >> Chris & Alex: could you give it a try and report back? > > I confirm that the patch you attached fixes this problem, thanks! Great, committed with a test as 960c6ce96d746cf19829ad26e092ec5dad2a5c62. > I have a (probably not related) question though: in the past, package > 'location' contained an *absolute* file name for the packages from > GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH. Now these locations are *relative* file names. Is > this intended? > > If so, this is a problem for Emacs-Guix: you see, when you try to open a > package location (for example, by pressing an according button in *Guix > Package Info* buffer), it is expanded against 'guix-directory' variable. > So if you open "gnu/packages/guile.scm" location, it works, but now if > it is your location like "my-guix-packages/foo.scm", the wrong > (non-existent) file will be opened. Previously it worked, because that > location was absolute, like "/home/me/my-guix-packages/foo.scm". I’ve noticed this but I didn’t think it was a regression. Basically Guile supports two “file name canonicalization” modes: one that returns a file name relative to %load-path, and one that returns an absolute file name. By default, when loading modules, we’re in ‘relative’ mode; this is so that modules can be moved on disk and don’t record their initial location. I think the last time this was changed was a year ago in 14d5ca2e2e57643b6b4acfb980b18b7474c27e7b. Thanks, Ludo’.
