guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#65743] [PATCH 0/2] gnu: python-qtsass: Update to 0.4.0, fix build.


From: Maxim Cournoyer
Subject: [bug#65743] [PATCH 0/2] gnu: python-qtsass: Update to 0.4.0, fix build.
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2023 09:20:27 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi Sharlatan,

Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus@gmail.com> writes:

> * gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm (python-libsass): Update to 0.22.0.
> [phases]: Add new phase 'silent-failing-tests and disable 2 failing
> tests to complete build.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm | 12 ++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm b/gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm
> index a950de3b46..5410f294d5 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm
> @@ -14359,7 +14359,7 @@ (define-public python-idna
>  (define-public python-libsass
>    (package
>      (name "python-libsass")
> -    (version "0.20.1")
> +    (version "0.22.0")
>      (source
>       (origin
>         ;; PyPI tarball is missing some test files.
> @@ -14369,7 +14369,7 @@ (define-public python-libsass
>               (commit version)))
>         (file-name (git-file-name name version))
>         (sha256
> -        (base32 "1r0kgl7i6nnhgjl44sjw57k08gh2qr7l8slqih550dyxbf1akbxh"))))
> +        (base32 "0j6c7jb1bnpmz76gs5za41qwgrs7v1yd1jkgvsy5ql6dg2ph9vp4"))))
>      (build-system python-build-system)
>      (arguments
>       '(#:phases
> @@ -14377,6 +14377,14 @@ (define-public python-libsass
>           ;; Use Guix package of libsass instead of compiling from a checkout.
>           (add-before 'build 'set-libsass
>             (lambda _ (setenv "SYSTEM_SASS" "indeed")))
> +         ;; XXX: Silent 2 failing test, check why they are failing.
> +         (add-before 'check 'silent-failing-tests
> +           (lambda _
> +             (substitute* "sasstests.py"
> +               (("def test_build_one")
> +                "def __off_test_build_one")
> +               (("def test_stack_trace_formatting")
> +                "def __off_test_stack_trace_formatting"))))

In my experience, it's nice to do a minimal investigation up-front and
report upstream; otherwise odds are that it will never happen :-).

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]