[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#26802: [PATCH 3/4] guix: lint: Check for version in source file name
From: |
Alex Kost |
Subject: |
bug#26802: [PATCH 3/4] guix: lint: Check for version in source file name. |
Date: |
Sun, 21 May 2017 12:00:47 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) |
Arun Isaac (2017-05-18 23:29 +0530) wrote:
>>> (define (origin-file-name-valid? origin)
>>> - ;; Return #f if the source file name contains only a version or is #f;
>>> - ;; indicates that the origin needs a 'file-name' field.
>>> + ;; Return #f if the source file name is #f, contains only a version, or
>>> + ;; does not contain a version; indicates that the origin needs a
>>> + ;; 'file-name' field.
>>> (let ((file-name (origin-actual-file-name origin))
>>> (version (package-version package)))
>>> (and file-name
>>> ;; Common in many projects is for the filename to start
>>> ;; with a "v" followed by the version,
>>> ;; e.g. "v3.2.0.tar.gz".
>>> - (not (string-match (string-append "^v?" version) file-name)))))
>>> + (not (string-match (string-append "^v?" version) file-name))
>>> + (string-match version file-name))))
>>
>> What about simply:
>>
>> (string-prefix? (string-append (package-name package) "-"
>> (package-version package))
>> file-name)
>
> This will break all those emacs, python, etc. packages that have
> "emacs-", "python-" prefixes in the package-name, but not in their
> source file names. We'll have to add the file-name field to practically
> every Guix package. I'm not sure this is a good idea.
Well, it will not "break" the packages, it will just add many new lint
warnings. But I agree that the Ludovic's version is too strict.
What I would prefer is to make this linter check for "name-version" (or
for "name" and "version" separately) inside a source file name (not with
'string-prefix?', but with 'string-match'), so that the store file names
will look like this:
foo-0.1.tar
emacs-bar-0.2.el
and not like this:
v0.1.tar
emacs-bar.el
> Couldn't we drop patch 3, and just use patch 4 to fix this bug?
I think so, patch 4 is definitely a fix for the original problem, while
a general file-name linting is probably for another thread.
--
Alex