bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hey Maxime, The let form was mostly included because, if possible, we should pull the value of `beets-python-version` from the version of python used for beets (because this implementation currently relies on a hardcoded and versioned library path in `lib/python3.9/site-packages`, it will requ

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Christopher Rodriguez schreef op ma 27-12-2021 om 13:18 [-0500]: +  (native-search-paths +   ;; XXX: Attempting to use (package-native-search-paths python) here would +   ;; cause an error about python being an unbound variable in the +   ;; tests. Instead, we set and use an explici

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Christopher Rodriguez schreef op ma 27-12-2021 om 13:18 [-0500]: > +  (let ((beets-python-version "3.9")) > +    (package [...])) I don't see the point of this 'let' form, because 'beets-python- version' appears to be used only once below. Greetings, Maxime. signature.asc Description: Thi

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi Maxime, Copy that, I can swap the 'prefix'es out for '='s. Would it be best to do that for all of them, to totally isolate the derivation from the environment? No rush on reviewing, thank You for spending so much time on this with me. I have learned a lot about Guix packages working throu

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Christopher Rodriguez schreef op ma 27-12-2021 om 13:18 [-0500]: > +   `("GST_PLUGIN_SYSTEM_PATH" ":" prefix (,gst- > plugins)) > +   `("GI_TYPELIB_PATH" ":" prefix (,types)) > +   `("GUIX_PYTHONPATH" ":" prefix (,beets- > plugins I think th

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Alright, I've gotten it working. After discussing on IRC with a few different people, I decided that making a new beets-specific variable was probably the best way forward. I've created $GUIX_BEETSPLUGINS for this purpose, which points to `/gnu/store/xxx-profile/lib/python3.9/site-packages`, a

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, > Are variables that point to places in the profile allowed? Or do they > have to only point to the store? That would solve the chicken and egg > problem here, where we can't hardcode the directory of the plugin > into 'beets' because the plugin is installed afterwards… I don't know what yo

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

On 12/22/21 3:50 PM, Maxime Devos wrote: python-build-system doesn't GUIX_PYTHONPATH, because that's the job of the native-search-paths of python. When a python library is being built, GUIX_PYTHONPATH is set because the library has python among its (implicit) inputs. The same holds for profile

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Christopher Rodriguez schreef op wo 22-12-2021 om 14:59 [-0500]: > Right now, beets is still calling the version of python in > `/gnu/store`, > but since it isn't installed alongside `beets` as a propagated-input > the > post-install step which sets that variable (which is called > `install

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Maxime Devos schreef op wo 22-12-2021 om 20:50 [+]: > python-build-system doesn't GUIX_PYTHONPATH, because that's the job of > the native-search-paths of python. [...] > Correction, it does set that environment variable in 'add-installed- pythonpath', but it only adds a few things and it does

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Christopher Rodriguez schreef op wo 22-12-2021 om 14:59 [-0500]: > I've been digging through the source, and it seems as though > `python-build-system` does not actually set the $GUIX_PYTHONPATH > variable in the environment. That variable seems to only be set by > `python-2.7` and its derivativ

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

I've been digging through the source, and it seems as though `python-build-system` does not actually set the $GUIX_PYTHONPATH variable in the environment. That variable seems to only be set by `python-2.7` and its derivatives, including `python3.9`, during a step after the install process. I

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Christopher Rodriguez schreef op wo 22-12-2021 om 12:07 [-0500]: > So, I took some time to do some digging this morning, and I now have a > few results and a few more questions. > > First, I tried `guix shell --pure python beets beets-bandcamp` to ensure > that the plugin would be detected

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

So, I took some time to do some digging this morning, and I now have a few results and a few more questions. First, I tried `guix shell --pure python beets beets-bandcamp` to ensure that the plugin would be detected once `GUIX_PYTHONPATH` was set as You had mentioned. That did work, though the

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Christopher Rodriguez schreef op di 21-12-2021 om 16:38 [-0500]: > Ah, I see. That makes sense. > > However, I don't think we need to necessarily use all of 'beets' inputs > as inputs for 'beets-bandcamp', because it will build fine with just the > inputs listed. I know it isn't DRY, but it seem

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Ah, I see. That makes sense. However, I don't think we need to necessarily use all of 'beets' inputs as inputs for 'beets-bandcamp', because it will build fine with just the inputs listed. I know it isn't DRY, but it seems like the most efficient way to define the package might be to simply de

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Christopher Rodriguez schreef op di 21-12-2021 om 14:47 [-0500]: > I believe the issue was indeed beets-bandcamp missing needed > beets-related inputs. I started by copying all of the inputs from beets, > and then removed each one to see if it was required for beets-bandcamp > to build succ

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

I believe the issue was indeed beets-bandcamp missing needed beets-related inputs. I started by copying all of the inputs from beets, and then removed each one to see if it was required for beets-bandcamp to build successfully. The attached patch works on my cloned repo; Is there somewhere else

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Copy that, Maxime. That makes sense. I'll work towards getting it to build without deleting that phase, then. Thanks for the feedback! On Tue, Dec 21, 2021, 13:02 Maxime Devos > wrote: Christopher Rodriguez schreef op di 21-12-2021 om 12:52 [-0500]: > Th

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Christopher Rodriguez schreef op di 21-12-2021 om 12:52 [-0500]: > That said, adding `(delete 'sanity-check)` for both beets and > beets-bandcamp does indeed make them build correctly. Is that the > appropriate fix here, or should I be trying to make them build > correctly > with the sanity chec

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi Simon, thanks for taking the time to help me with this! I am currently trying to set up a development environment for myself, but I've run into some issues (which I've submitted as #52708) in the `make check` process. I'm editing the package definition for `beets-bandcamp` nonetheless, but

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

Hi, Thanks for your report. It is collateral issue of recent core-updates merge which major updates. Almost was fine, except sparse packages which seem broken. The commit merging core-updates is 6dffced09e (where the one you mention 2c469f0 is a direct descendant), so the 2 parents are: b603554

bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build

   __     [BUG] MULTIPLE PACKAGES FAILING TO BUILD     rodnchr    __ Table of Contents _ 1. Environment 2. Steps to reproduce 3. Expe