Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-07-13 Thread ng0
Hi, thanks. Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi! > > ng0 skribis: > >> Could someone with the right privileges mark this in patchwork as >> commited? I have no options in the below link to mark it as >> anything. >> >> http://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/13377/ > > Done. Unfortunately I won’t have

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-07-11 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! ng0 skribis: > Could someone with the right privileges mark this in patchwork as > commited? I have no options in the below link to mark it as > anything. > > http://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/13377/ Done. Unfortunately I won’t have the patience to manually mark patches as committed.

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-07-05 Thread ng0
Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello, > > Matthew Jordan skribis: > >>> Also, why do we need this “src” output? IIUC, it contains the source of >>> some of the unit tests, right? >> >> I changed the "src" output to "tests", to clarify. > > OK; it’s not clear to me if users need it, but it probably do

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-27 Thread Matthew Jordan
> What is this "bash" used for? I don't see it referred to in the install > phase. Thanks. I'll remove it in the next patch for go@1.4. -- Matthew Jordan Sent with my mu4e

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-27 Thread Matthew Jordan
> I also noticed the unusual file system layout in the main output: > > --8<---cut here---start->8--- > $ ls $(./pre-inst-env guix build go) > /gnu/store/05al7hhwng4a5hs1ix2i4agqzm9cs4gy-go-1.4.3-doc: > share > > /gnu/store/6f6ns5c7gfr79pl190r9xjyx6rbx1vv1-go-1.

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-27 Thread Leo Famulari
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 06:14:48PM -0400, Matthew Jordan wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add go@1.4 > > * gnu/local.mk: Modified file. > * gnu/packages/golang.scm: New file. > + (replace 'install > + (lambda* (#:key outputs inputs #:allow-other-keys) > + (let* ((outpu

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-27 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Matthew Jordan skribis: >> One last thing I forgot to mention: building with --rounds=2 shows that >> the build is not reproducible (some differences in a few .a files.) >> >> If you prefer, we can address it in a later patch, though. > > Yes I would prefer address this issue in a later patch. S

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-27 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, Matthew Jordan skribis: >> Also, why do we need this “src” output? IIUC, it contains the source of >> some of the unit tests, right? > > I changed the "src" output to "tests", to clarify. OK; it’s not clear to me if users need it, but it probably doesn’t hurt to keep it. > From 9063100

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-26 Thread Matthew Jordan
Good Day, > One last thing I forgot to mention: building with --rounds=2 shows that > the build is not reproducible (some differences in a few .a files.) > > If you prefer, we can address it in a later patch, though. Yes I would prefer address this issue in a later patch. Respectuflly, -- Matt

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-26 Thread Matthew Jordan
Good Day, > Since there are parts I don’t fully understand, I thought I’d leave it > up to you. In particular, could you could at least replace the “why” in > the comments below with explanations of why this is done? I updated the patch with additional comments as suggested. Let me know if more

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-14 Thread Ludovic Courtès
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > It seems we’re almost done! I was about to commit it with the changes > below on top of the patch you posted (they are mostly cosmetic.) > > Since there are parts I don’t fully understand, I thought I’d leave it > up to you. In particular, could you coul

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-12 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! It seems we’re almost done! I was about to commit it with the changes below on top of the patch you posted (they are mostly cosmetic.) Since there are parts I don’t fully understand, I thought I’d leave it up to you. In particular, could you could at least replace the “why” in the comments

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-09 Thread Matthew Jordan
Good Day, I have updated the package in accordance with the suggestions made. >From 16ff70593c243290d0fe6288e75caeb2897d292c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Jordan Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 08:57:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add go@1.4 * gnu/local.mk: Modified file. * gnu/packages/golang.

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-06 Thread Andy Wingo
On Mon 06 Jun 2016 11:05, Alex Vong writes: > I think match-lambda is not documented in the guile manual (it only > appears in an example). While its usage is more or less the same as in > racket, I think it should be documented. What is your idea? Yes it should be documented :) Andy

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-06 Thread Alex Vong
Hello, I think match-lambda is not documented in the guile manual (it only appears in an example). While its usage is more or less the same as in racket, I think it should be documented. What is your idea? Thanks, Alex On 06/06/2016, Andy Wingo wrote: > Hi :) > > Looking good! I have some styl

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-06 Thread Andy Wingo
Hi :) Looking good! I have some style nits :) On Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:39, Matthew Jordan writes: > + ;; Removing net/ tests > + (for-each > +(lambda (srcfile) > + (let ((srcfile (string-append "net/" srcfile))) > + (i

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-03 Thread Matthew Jordan
Good Day, Patch updated as suggested. >From debf89e7a3456862b6de77e8d948b954d88bfca6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Jordan Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 08:57:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add go@1.4 * gnu/local.mk: Modified file. * gnu/packages/golang.scm: New file. Co-author: Efraim Flashn

Re: [Patch] go@1.4 Updated patch

2016-06-03 Thread Alex Griffin
I don't think this package needs to depend on rc or gccgo. Without rc, guix will fail to patch the paths to rc, but those are only used on Plan 9 systems. And despite a few references to gccgo in the package definition, removing it does not actually affect the build at all. -- Alex Griffin

Re: [Patch] go@1.4

2016-06-03 Thread Andy Wingo
Hi, Sounds great :) On Thu 02 Jun 2016 18:29, Matthew Jordan writes: > Also do you mind if I add you name and email an Co-author of these three > packages? Sure, sounds fine. Cheers, Andy

Re: [Patch] go@1.4

2016-06-02 Thread Matthew Jordan
Hey Andy and everyone, Just a quick update, will send more details, or some patches later. Just finished up building go@1.5.4, thanks to last bit you sent. The runpath now validates in both go@1.4.3 and go@1.5.4. All enabled test now pass. >> if Linkshared { >> seenDirs := ma

Re: [Patch] go@1.4

2016-06-02 Thread Andy Wingo
Hi, How goes the patching? FWIW for Go 1.5 and 1.6, if I remove this test in the linker then I can build without the LD_LIBRARY_PATH hacks and the tests work for me: On Sun 29 May 2016 19:49, Andy Wingo writes: > if Linkshared { > seenDirs := make(map[string]bool) >

Re: [Patch] go@1.4

2016-05-29 Thread Matthew Jordan
Hi Andy, And thanks for code snippet, I'll look at and see how I can integrate it with the current patches. I'm new to both go and guile, so there is still much to learn. Thanks again! -- Matthew Jordan Sent with my mu4e Andy Wingo writes: > Hi! > > I also took a look at this package over t

Re: [Patch] go@1.4

2016-05-29 Thread Andy Wingo
Hi! I also took a look at this package over the weekend but was away from the internet. It turns out that what is needed is to add "-rpath" invocations to Go itself. The issue is that Go binaries are still dynamically linked to libgcc_s, but of course there is no useful default search path in wh