[bug#43194] [PATCH] gnu: publicly define freedink-engine and freedink-data

[Jesse Gibbons]

Sorry it took so long. Updated patch is attached.

-Jesse.

On 9/24/20 9:18 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Ping!  :-)
>
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> skribis:
...
> > > -> Freedink-engine installs desktop files to launch freedink without
> > > freedink-dfarc or the console. This is actually a new issue I will
> > > address in an updated patch: the desktop files fail because the data
> > > location is not hard-coded. I think the freedink desktop file can be
> > > patched if freedink-data is an input, but, like I said above, it's
> > > pointless to use dinkedit on a read-only directory, so I intend to
> > > remove it.
The patch removes both desktop files.
> > OK, makes sense—thanks for explaining.

> > > > >    (define-public freedink
> > > > >      ;; This is a wrapper that tells the engine where to find the data.
> > > > > -  (package (inherit freedink-engine)
> > > > > +  (package ;(inherit freedink-engine)
> > > > Is it intended?  Looks like inheriting avoids duplicating fields, no?
> > > Oops! I did not intend to leave (inherit freedink-engine) in a
> > > comment. I initially commented it out because freedink does nothing
> > > with the source anyway, and I wanted to see what would happen if I
> > > removed the inheritance. I guess I forgot to remove the semicolon and
> > > other additions.
The patch fixes this.

> > > As noted above, it is easiest to use freedink-dfarc to launch the
> > > editor, but freedink-dfarc must be told what editor to use, and it is
> > > easier to identify it if the editor is installed in a profile (or
> > > included as an input). Also, freedink-engine includes (broken) desktop
> > > files. Since freedink just installs a wrapper script around the
> > > engine, and does not include the editor or any desktop files, perhaps
> > > it would be better to put the wrapper script in freedink-engine (thus
> > > fixing the desktop file), completely remove the freedink package, and
> > > rename "freedink-engine" to just "freedink"? But freedink-dfarc would
> > > still need to be able to launch freedink without pointing to any
> > > read-only data if a user wants to test the edited freedink data.
> > Maybe, sounds like a reasonable option.
The patch does not do this. For now, I don't have the time (and probably 
won't have much time until late December), so I'll leave it as a to-do 
item for anyone who wants to accomplish this.

-Jesse

0001-gnu-publicly-define-freedink-engine-and-freedink-dat.patch
Description: Text Data