GNU bug report logs - #57858
[PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input

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 57858 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 57858 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: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 14:37:17 +0200

* gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm (git-annex): changed inputs
[propagated-inputs]: Add git
[inputs]: Remove git
---
 gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm b/gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm
index 50380281d7..d5e855cf9a 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm
@@ -462,8 +462,9 @@ (define-public git-annex
            ghc-utf8-string
            ghc-uuid
            ghc-vector
-           git
            rsync))
+    (propagated-inputs
+     (list git))
     (native-inputs
      (list ghc-tasty ghc-tasty-hunit ghc-tasty-quickcheck ghc-tasty-rerun
            perl))
-- 
2.37.3

Message #8 received at 57858 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>, 57858 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57858] [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated
 input
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:02:41 +0200

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

On 16-09-2022 14:37, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> * gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm (git-annex): changed inputs
> [propagated-inputs]: Add git
> [inputs]: Remove git
> ---
>   gnu/packages/haskell-apps.scm | 3 ++-
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

What's the reason for this patch?  My guess is that it's because 
git-annex cannot find git:

$ guix shell --pure git-annex -- git-annex test
git-annex: git: createProcess: posix_spawnp: does not exist (No such 
file or directory)

If so, propagation (which as a few small downsides) can be avoided with 
an appropriate substitute* fixing the file name of the git binary.

Greetings,
Maxime

[OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc (application/pgp-keys, attachment)]

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #11 received at 57858 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>, 57858 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57858] [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated
 input
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2022 11:56:23 +0200

Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> writes:

> What's the reason for this patch?  My guess is that it's because 
> git-annex cannot find git:

That was indeed the starting point. But...

> If so, propagation (which as a few small downsides) can be avoided with 
> an appropriate substitute* fixing the file name of the git binary.

... I tried that and still got error messages whose exact cause I don't
quite understand.

What made me opt for git as a propagated input is that (1) it works just
fine and (2) there isn't much you can do with git-annex without having
git as well. git is even the official user interface of git-annex.

Cheers,
  Konrad

Message #16 received at 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
Cc: 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Subject: Re: bug#57858: [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 10:07:46 +0200

Hi,

Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net> skribis:

> Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> writes:
>
>> What's the reason for this patch?  My guess is that it's because 
>> git-annex cannot find git:
>
> That was indeed the starting point. But...
>
>> If so, propagation (which as a few small downsides) can be avoided with 
>> an appropriate substitute* fixing the file name of the git binary.
>
> ... I tried that and still got error messages whose exact cause I don't
> quite understand.
>
> What made me opt for git as a propagated input is that (1) it works just
> fine and (2) there isn't much you can do with git-annex without having
> git as well. git is even the official user interface of git-annex.

Yeah, that sounds reasonable: I’d have made the same suggestion as
Maxime but any improvement here is welcome.

Applied, thanks!

Ludo’.

Message #19 received at 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Konrad Hinsen
 <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
Cc: 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Subject: Re: bug#57858: [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:29:52 +0200

Hi,

On lun., 17 oct. 2022 at 10:07, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>> What made me opt for git as a propagated input is that (1) it works just
>> fine and (2) there isn't much you can do with git-annex without having
>> git as well. git is even the official user interface of git-annex.
>
> Yeah, that sounds reasonable: I’d have made the same suggestion as
> Maxime but any improvement here is welcome.

We are usually not propagating.  For example, emacs-magit or git-lfs or
etc.

From my understanding, this change is not coherent with other parts.

About (2), what do you mean Konrad?  Is ’git-annex’ not working as
expected?  Well, ’git annex’ is a shorthand for ’git-annex’ and I
thought this ’git-annex’ is self-contained; for which operations
’git-annex’ depends on the ’git’ binaires?

Cheers,
simon

Message #22 received at 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, Ludovic Courtès
 <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Subject: Re: bug#57858: [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:11:26 +0200

zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:

> About (2), what do you mean Konrad?  Is ’git-annex’ not working as
> expected?  Well, ’git annex’ is a shorthand for ’git-annex’ and I
> thought this ’git-annex’ is self-contained; for which operations
> ’git-annex’ depends on the ’git’ binaires?

Maxime quoted a simple command line example. git-annex requires git for
pretty much everything it does.

But that's not the question here. As Maxime said, git could just be a
standard (non-propagated) input with a small patch to git-annex. That
makes it work to a large degree (requiring you to replace "git annex" by
"git-annex" in all command lines), but it occasionally failed for me and
I didn't invest much effort to explore why, given that I consider it
pointless to try to use git-annex without git.

But you are right in pointing out that this is an instance of a
situation for which Guix should have a general policy. git-lfs is
probably in exactly the same situation. Not emacs-magit though: it works
perfectly fine without exposing git in the same profile. Being a git
plugin is not the same as being a git wrapper.

Cheers,
  Konrad

Message #25 received at 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Subject: Re: [bug#57858] [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated
 input
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:02:59 +0200

Hi Konrad,

On lun., 17 oct. 2022 at 12:11, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net> wrote:

> But you are right in pointing out that this is an instance of a
> situation for which Guix should have a general policy. git-lfs is
> probably in exactly the same situation. Not emacs-magit though: it works
> perfectly fine without exposing git in the same profile. Being a git
> plugin is not the same as being a git wrapper.

From my understanding, the general policy is to not propagate git. :-)

From gnu/packages/version-control.scm, where xyz: is the line number

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
778:(define-public git-cal                     no inputs
907:(define-public git-crypt                   inputs: git
960:(define-public git-remote-gcrypt           no inputs
1108:(define-public python-git-multimail       inputs: git
1311:(define-public git-flow                   inputs: no git
1451:(define-public git-test-sequence          no inputs
2681:(define-public git-annex-remote-rclone    inputs: no git
2901:(define-public git-when-merged            inputs: git
2952:(define-public git-imerge                 inputs: git
2997:(define-public git-lfs                    native-inputs only and no git
3046:(define-public git-open                   inputs: no git
3392:(define-public git-filter-repo            inputs: no git
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

The package git-repo from (gnu packages android) contains git as
inputs.  The package git-absord from (gnu packages rust-apps) does not
contains git as inputs.


I understand the issue but I think the propagation is not the correct
solution. :-)


Cheers,
simon

Message #28 received at 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>,
 zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, Ludovic Courtès
 <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 57858-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#57858: [PATCH] gnu: git-annex: Promote git to propagated input
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 14:55:31 +0200

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

On 17-10-2022 12:11, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> But you are right in pointing out that this is an instance of a
> situation for which Guix should have a general policy. git-lfs is
> probably in exactly the same situation. Not emacs-magit though: it works
> perfectly fine without exposing git in the same profile. Being a git
> plugin is not the same as being a git wrapper.

The current policy, IMO, is that plugins don't propagate what they are 
plugged into -- even if the plugin is useless without the thing it 
plugs-in into (compare: search paths are set in 'consumers', not 
'producers').

Taking 'emacs-magit' as an example, emacs-magit is an Emacs plugin, but 
it doesn't propagate emacs.

Likewise, (in some usages) 'git-annex' is a git plugin, yet it (IMO) 
shouldn't propagate git.

Greetings
Maxime.

[OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc (application/pgp-keys, attachment)]

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Previous Next

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