[bug#48325] julia-1.6 guix

[zimoun]

Hi,

On Tue, 11 May 2021 at 11:38, Jean-Baptiste Volatier <jbv@pm.me> wrote:
> I splitted the patch in 5. If it is not possible to update pcre2, we only
> need to disable a couple of tests.

Well, 1 tests are failing, if I am correct.  However, I am not sure it
is an option to remove this dependency.  The package utf8proc leads also
to a big rebuild, for instance ’subversion’ which implies a lot. :-)

I have not finished yet to test and I should send a patch set today or
tomorrow…

> zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
>> I am not convinced by this move of patches from ’source’ to ’phases’.
>> My understanding about the usual way is to let the patch in the source
>> field.  Is this move motivated by something special?
>
> Yes. Some of the patches need to be applied with the "-p1" flag some with
> "-p2". In the source field it is not possible to do so. So I would
> need to modify beforehand the "p2" patches for example, and I could not
> think of a nice way to do that without including the patches directly
> in gnu/packages/patches which does not seem like a nice option.
> And since all these patches are in julia source, I thought it was
> nicer this way.

…because I am not clear with this, yet.


>>> +               (link "zlib" "usr/lib/julia/" "libz\\.so")
>
>> Does this fix
>>
>>   <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/48238>
>
>> ?  If yes, cool and thank you! :-)  So it should be mentioned in the
>> commit message, something like:
>
> No it does not. Reason for this is that the install target of the
> makefile copies a bunch of libraries from the build directory
> to the install directory. I guess "normally" you rely on the makefile
> to also build these libraries for you. In our case many libraries are
> missing in this folder at the end of the build target
> so I create the symlinks so the install target works
> and also julia can later on find the libraries.
> For some reason utf8proc and libLLVM-11 need to be symlinked directly
> in the install directory, this is done in the next phase.

Thanks for the explanations.  Let discuss that in the aforementioned
bug#48238. :-)

>>> +       ("nss-certs" ,nss-certs)         ; required to precompile
>
>> Hum?  Is it really necessary?
>
> I think it is necessary for some of the tests. So I moved it to
> native-inputs is that correct ?

Yes, that’s my understanding.


Cheers,
simon