GNU bug report logs - #35518
gnu: guile-pfds bugfix

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: amirouche <at> hyper.dev

Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 00:53:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 35518 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 35518 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 01 May 2019 00:53:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to amirouche <at> hyper.dev:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to guix-patches <at> gnu.org. (Wed, 01 May 2019 00:53:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
To: guix-patches gnu <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Wed, 01 May 2019 02:52:13 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
I am not sure how to handle this case.
[0001-gnu-guile-pfds-bugfix.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 01 May 2019 05:27:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
To: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 01 May 2019 05:42:29 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Forgo the first, this patch is not perfect because It doesn't force an 
update.

[0001-gnu-guile-pfds-bugfix.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 01 May 2019 06:21:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Wed, 01 May 2019 08:20:30 +0200
Hi amirouche,

> I am not sure how to handle this case.

Is this fix available upstream?  Has this been reported upstream?  In
either case there should be a note about the upstream status of this
change.

I’d prefer not to add a patch file here but to add a build phase after
unpack that uses substitute* to patch the file.

--
Ricardo





Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 01 May 2019 10:59:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Wed, 01 May 2019 12:58:03 +0200
On 2019-05-01 08:20, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Hi amirouche,
> 
>> I am not sure how to handle this case.
> 
> Is this fix available upstream?

It is not available upstream. The maintainer is unresponsive for several 
months (years?).

> Has this been reported upstream?

Yes at https://github.com/ijp/pfds/pull/6

> In either case there should be a note about the upstream status of this
> change.

I think pfds would need a new maintainer.

> I’d prefer not to add a patch file here but to add a build phase after
> unpack that uses substitute* to patch the file.

Ok I will do that.




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 01 May 2019 11:48:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #17 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Wed, 01 May 2019 13:46:59 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 2019-05-01 08:20, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> 
> I’d prefer not to add a patch file here but to add a build phase after
> unpack that uses substitute* to patch the file.
> 

new patch
[0001-gnu-guile-pfds-bugfix.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 06 May 2019 08:06:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 10:05:30 +0200
Hi Amirouche,

amirouche <at> hyper.dev skribis:

> On 2019-05-01 08:20, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>>
>> I’d prefer not to add a patch file here but to add a build phase after
>> unpack that uses substitute* to patch the file.
>>
>
> new patch
>
> From de22b734f37c2701121b990fe1fda5ead67ece31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Amirouche <amirouche+dev <at> hyper.dev>
> Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 13:41:59 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
>
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[version]: upgrade to 0.3-0
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[commit]: hardcode v0.3
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[arguments]: New phase 'patch'

[...]

> +                  (add-after 'unpack 'patch
> +                    (lambda _
> +                      (substitute* "hamts.sls"
> +                        (("subtrie-vector vector")
> +                         "subtrie-vector trie"))
> +                        #t))

Like Ricardo wrote: “there should be a note about the upstream status of
this change.”  Someone reading this cannot understand what this change
is about nor what upstream thinks about it.

Could you address this issue?

Bonus points if you change it to follow our conventions for the commit
log and for the Git checkouts.  :-)

  https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Submitting-Patches.html
  https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Version-Numbers.html

Thanks in advance,
Ludo’.




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 06 May 2019 08:07:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #23 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 10:05:52 +0200
Hi Amirouche,

amirouche <at> hyper.dev skribis:

> On 2019-05-01 08:20, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>>
>> I’d prefer not to add a patch file here but to add a build phase after
>> unpack that uses substitute* to patch the file.
>>
>
> new patch
>
> From de22b734f37c2701121b990fe1fda5ead67ece31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Amirouche <amirouche+dev <at> hyper.dev>
> Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 13:41:59 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
>
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[version]: upgrade to 0.3-0
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[commit]: hardcode v0.3
> - gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm(guile-pfds)[arguments]: New phase 'patch'

[...]

> +                  (add-after 'unpack 'patch
> +                    (lambda _
> +                      (substitute* "hamts.sls"
> +                        (("subtrie-vector vector")
> +                         "subtrie-vector trie"))
> +                        #t))

Like Ricardo wrote: “there should be a note about the upstream status of
this change.”  Someone reading this cannot understand what this change
is about nor what upstream thinks about it.

Could you address this issue?

Bonus points if you change it to follow our conventions for the commit
log and for the Git checkouts.  :-)

  https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Submitting-Patches.html
  https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Version-Numbers.html

Thanks in advance,
Ludo’.




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 06 May 2019 11:10:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #26 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] (no subject)
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 13:09:44 +0200
amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:

> Forgo the first, this patch is not perfect because It doesn't force an 
> update.

The attached patch is more than 15MB in size.  I haven’t looked at it
but I guess that’s not correct.

-- 
Ricardo





Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 06 May 2019 12:43:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #29 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] [PATCH] fix guile-pfds bug
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 14:42:45 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 2019-05-06 13:09, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:
> 
>> Forgo the first, this patch is not perfect because It doesn't force an
>> update.
> 
> The attached patch is more than 15MB in size.  I haven’t looked at it
> but I guess that’s not correct.

I am not sure which patch you are referring to.

Here is another patch. I followed the "Submitting Patches" section
from the manual.

[0001-gnu-guile-pfds-bugfix.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Mon, 06 May 2019 13:11:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #32 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#35518] [PATCH] fix guile-pfds bug
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 15:10:14 +0200
amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:

> On 2019-05-06 13:09, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:
>>
>>> Forgo the first, this patch is not perfect because It doesn't force an
>>> update.
>>
>> The attached patch is more than 15MB in size.  I haven’t looked at it
>> but I guess that’s not correct.
>
> I am not sure which patch you are referring to.

The one you attached in the message with Message-Id
<efe8b23d1011887a36f65620fd24e514 <at> hyper.dev>

--
Ricardo





Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 26 Jun 2019 01:48:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #35 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Amirouche <amirouche <at> hyper.dev>
To: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: upstream unresponsive
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 03:47:12 +0200
I had no response from Ian J. Price the original maintainer of pfds.

Can some else try to reach him?




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#35518; Package guix-patches. (Sat, 06 Jun 2020 03:34:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #38 received at 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jack Hill <jackhill <at> jackhill.us>
To: Amirouche <amirouche+dev <at> hyper.dev>
Cc: 35518 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: guile-pfds hamts fix
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 23:33:40 -0400 (EDT)
I came across this bug today. It seems like upstream activity on 
guile-pfds is dorment, unfortunately, so it would be good to get this fix 
in Guix. Perhaps all the needs to be done is directing readers to the 
proposed fix at the upstream repository.

Best,
Jack




Reply sent to Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>:
You have taken responsibility. (Wed, 14 Jul 2021 02:44:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to amirouche <at> hyper.dev:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Wed, 14 Jul 2021 02:44:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #43 received at 35518-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: amirouche <at> hyper.dev
Cc: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, 35518-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#35518: gnu: guile-pfds bugfix
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 22:43:44 -0400
amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:

> On 2019-05-06 13:09, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> amirouche <at> hyper.dev writes:
>> 
>>> Forgo the first, this patch is not perfect because It doesn't force an
>>> update.
>> The attached patch is more than 15MB in size.  I haven’t looked at
>> it
>> but I guess that’s not correct.
>
> I am not sure which patch you are referring to.
>
> Here is another patch. I followed the "Submitting Patches" section
> from the manual.

Applied as 51194ca1e845d5f3954cb9dd1fef79e930dc3777, adding only the
patching phase with an explanatory comment.

Thanks!

Closing.

Maxim




bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Wed, 11 Aug 2021 11:24:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 2 years and 230 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.