GNU bug report logs - #52784
[PATCH 0/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 52784 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 52784 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

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

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: Guix-patches <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:22:35 +0000

Hello,

Incoming are patches to update XMonad and ghc-xmonad-contrib to the new release, 0.17.0. This required some new Haskell packages and minor changes to xmonad. I've tested this builds but haven't tried running the newer versions (currently away from my main Guix computer). I also updated xmobar (again, untested beyond building).

Note that this new version has breaking configuration changes, detailed in their announcement: https://xmonad.org/news/2021/10/27/xmonad-0-17-0.html  Is that worth a news entry for guix pull? It has been a long time since xmonad released a new version, for those that stay on the stable release.

John

Message #8 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: "52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:28:47 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Empty Message

[0001-gnu-Add-ghc-primitive-addr.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #11 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: "52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:29:06 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Empty Message

[0002-gnu-Add-ghc-semirings.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #14 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: "52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:29:27 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Empty Message

[0003-gnu-Add-ghc-quickcheck-classes.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #17 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: "52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:29:44 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Empty Message

[0004-gnu-xmonad-Update-to-0.17.0.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #20 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: "52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 19:30:04 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Empty Message

[0005-gnu-xmobar-Update-to-0.40.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #23 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
To: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 0/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 11:24:33 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi John,

thanks for your patches. I also upgraded xmonad locally (see
attached patch), but I didn’t need the version bumps/new packages
(i.e. xmonad’s test suite builds and runs fine). Are they really
necessary?

> Note that this new version has breaking configuration changes, detailed in their announcement: https://xmonad.org/news/2021/10/27/xmonad-0-17-0.html  Is that worth a news entry for guix pull? It has been a long time since xmonad released a new version, for those that stay on the stable release.
I was also hesitant to push the new version for this reason. Additionally
xmonad is part of Stackage, which we use where possible. How about adding
a xmonad-next package instead and make the switch when Stackage includes
the new version?

Cheers,
Lars

[xmonad-0.17-dirty.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Message #26 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Cc: 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 0/5] Update XMonad (and add new dependencies)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 19:15:11 +0000

Hi Lars,

Thanks for taking a look and testing.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Tuesday, December 28th, 2021 at 5:24 AM, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> thanks for your patches. I also upgraded xmonad locally (see
> attached patch), but I didn’t need the version bumps/new packages
> (i.e. xmonad’s test suite builds and runs fine). Are they really
> necessary?
>

I can confirm your patch also builds and checks fine (though didn't look at the log in much detail).

Taking a quick look at the new dependency, it is for some testing but seems optional: https://github.com/xmonad/xmonad/commit/031bbd62306e592ddd0768d4e5b1105bf5e81032 So maybe that's why it builds/checks fine. Since we can easily add the needed packages, I would err on including it, what do you think?

I removed/added dependencies based on a fresh guix import and looking at the Hackage info for xmonad. I think some of the dependencies that were removed were due to older versions (or to support older GHC?) or I guess libraries that aren't needed anymore.

> > Note that this new version has breaking configuration changes, detailed in their announcement: https://xmonad.org/news/2021/10/27/xmonad-0-17-0.html Is that worth a news entry for guix pull? It has been a long time since xmonad released a new version, for those that stay on the stable release.
>
> I was also hesitant to push the new version for this reason. Additionally
> xmonad is part of Stackage, which we use where possible. How about adding
> a xmonad-next package instead and make the switch when Stackage includes
> the new version?
>

We do tend to follow LTS Stackage, but I wasn't sure how something like XMonad fits since I imagine most people that use it aren't using Haskell otherwise. Also, since it has been a few years since they had a release, I thought it would be nice to have it.

Anyway, an xmonad-next could make the transition easier for anyone using the previous stable release. I've been using cabal but with an update in Guix would look to make my setup more Guix-y.

To summarize, I would opt for the changes in dependencies to follow upstream, and making a separate xmonad-next avoids further disruption anyway. Personally, I also wanted to submit those new packages as part of a whole lot of Haskell packages I will be submitting to get haskell-gi and taffybar in Guix.

Thanks,
John

Message #29 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Cc: 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 4/5 v2] Add xmonad-next and
 ghc-xmonad-contrib-next.
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 01:54:25 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Lars,

Here is version two of the patch (number 4/5) this time adding the updated xmonad and xmonad-contrib versions as new variables. I kept in the previous commit message of the changes relative to the current version (0.16), but wasn't sure if that was appropriate. The xmonad compile patch was added as a new patch and added to local.mk.

I don't use xmobar and wasn't sure about that, doesn't seem to have explicit dependencies on xmonad or xmonad-contrib. So I've left it as is, though I'm guessing would need to be rebased due to the line changes?

How does that look to you?

John

[0004-gnu-Add-xmonad-next-and-ghc-xmonad-contrib-next.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #32 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
To: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 4/5 v2] Add xmonad-next and
 ghc-xmonad-contrib-next.
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:38:57 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

> Here is version two of the patch (number 4/5) this time adding the updated xmonad and xmonad-contrib versions as new variables. I kept in the previous commit message of the changes relative to the current version (0.16), but wasn't sure if that was appropriate. The xmonad compile patch was added as a new patch and added to local.mk.
It would be nice if we could use inheritance to avoid duplicated
metadata. I implemented that on top of your changes in the attached patch,
so when the time comes we can just delete xmonad and rename xmonad-next
to xmonad. What do you think?
 
> I don't use xmobar and wasn't sure about that, doesn't seem to have explicit dependencies on xmonad or xmonad-contrib. So I've left it as is, though I'm guessing would need to be rebased due to the line changes?
I tested it and the new version works fine for me.

Cheers,
Lars

[xmonad-inherit.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #35 received at 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Cc: 52784 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 4/5 v2] Add xmonad-next and
 ghc-xmonad-contrib-next.
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 18:49:59 +0000

Hi Lars,

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Saturday, January 15th, 2022 at 5:38 AM, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > Here is version two of the patch (number 4/5) this time adding the updated xmonad and xmonad-contrib versions as new variables. I kept in the previous commit message of the changes relative to the current version (0.16), but wasn't sure if that was appropriate. The xmonad compile patch was added as a new patch and added to local.mk.
>
> It would be nice if we could use inheritance to avoid duplicated
> metadata. I implemented that on top of your changes in the attached patch,
> so when the time comes we can just delete xmonad and rename xmonad-next
> to xmonad. What do you think?
>

Yes, that makes more sense, let's go with that.

> > I don't use xmobar and wasn't sure about that, doesn't seem to have explicit dependencies on xmonad or xmonad-contrib. So I've left it as is, though I'm guessing would need to be rebased due to the line changes?
>
> I tested it and the new version works fine for me.
>

Ah, good to know. (I've been using polybar but have a huge stack of packages to add taffybar. I've been putting off submitting it because it is a lot of packages that I need to figure where each goes, but I'll get to it. If you were interested in trying out taffybar, let me know and I can make the WIP patches available for testing.)

Thanks for your work on this, I'll have to try moving my xmonad cabal setup to just Guix now.

John

Message #40 received at 52784-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
To: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: 52784-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#52784] [PATCH 4/5 v2] Add xmonad-next and
 ghc-xmonad-contrib-next.
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 20:32:13 +0100

Hi John,

> Yes, that makes more sense, let's go with that.
I merged your patches as 5387a9c00ef2f972c32ab4430a3f1879131b1652 and
following. Thank you!

> Ah, good to know. (I've been using polybar but have a huge stack of packages to add taffybar. I've been putting off submitting it because it is a lot of packages that I need to figure where each goes, but I'll get to it. If you were interested in trying out taffybar, let me know and I can make the WIP patches available for testing.)
Sure, I can try out taffybar.

Cheers,
Lars

Previous Next

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