[PATCH 0/2] gnu: Add guile-srfi-146.

Hello Guix,

This adds Guile bindings to SRFI 146 (Mappings) and SRFI 128 (Comparators

(reduced) - a dependency of SRFI 146).

SRFI 146 provides some very nice purely functional data structures for

mappings.

This patch set should be tested (and applied) after #57053, which fixes the

build of a dependency (SRFI 158).

Best regards,

pukkamustard

pukkamustard (2):

gnu: Add guile-srfi-128.

gnu: Add guile-srfi-146.

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)

--

2.37.1

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)

On 08-08-2022 10:36, pukkamustard wrote:

guile-3.0 is used as a compiler, so it needs to be in native-inputs. 

Does "guix build guile-srfi-146 --target=aarch64-linux-gnu" (or with

another target) work?

There are also some (ISC?) bits on

https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/tree/srfi/srfi-146.scm.

Also, Guix does not yet install the 'LICENSES' subdirectory, see

https://issues.guix.gnu.org/54234#1.

Greetings,

Maxime.

Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:

It does not!

Adding guile-3.0 to both native-inputs and inputs seems to solve this

(also for guile-srfi-158).

However, I then get following error:

```

no code for module (srfi srfi-128)

```

guile-srfi-128 is built using the guile-build-system. Maybe something

not working properly with guile-build-system and cross-compilation?

Do you have any ideas or suggestions on how to fix this?

Yes, the sample SRFI implementation is licensed under ISC. Afaiu,

there's no problem in relicensing this as LGPL-3.0-or-later. I think a

lot of the guile-srfi-* libraries do this.

Noted.

Cheers,

pukkamustard

On Mon Aug 8, 2022 at 1:43 PM BST, pukkamustard wrote:

You should only need to add it in native-inputs.

-- (

"(" <paren@disroot.org> writes:

If I only add guile-3.0 to native-inputs (and not to inputs), the build

fails like this:

```

configure: checking for guile 3.0

configure: checking for guile 2.2

configure: checking for guile 2.0

configure: error:

No Guile development packages were found.

Please verify that you have Guile installed. If you installed Guile

from a binary distribution, please verify that you have also installed

the development packages. If you installed it yourself, you might need

to adjust your PKG_CONFIG_PATH; see the pkg-config man page for more.

error: in phase 'configure': uncaught exception:

%exception #<&invoke-error program: "/gnu/store/4y5m9lb8k3qkb1y9m02sw9w9a6hacd16-bash-minimal-5.1.8/bin/bash" arguments: ("./configure" "CC_FOR_BUILD=gcc" "CONFIG_SHELL=/gnu/store/4y5m9lb8k3qkb1y9m02sw9w9a6hacd16-bash-minimal-5.1.8/bin/bash" "SHELL=/gnu/store/4y5m9lb8k3qkb1y9m02sw9w9a6hacd16-bash-minimal-5.1.8/bin/bash" "--prefix=/gnu/store/qhcnb9giiahhb2p7y7q05gs4ndhln4yk-guile-srfi-146-0.1.0" "--enable-fast-install" "--build=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" "--host=arm-linux-gnueabihf") exit-status: 1 term-signal: #f stop-signal: #f>

phase `configure' failed after 0.6 seconds

```

Quite possibly that something is wrong with the configure.ac. Same thing

also happens with guile-srfi-158.

-pukkamustard

On 08-08-2022 14:43, pukkamustard wrote:

I have looked at license text, and it states that it allows

'sublicensing', but it doesn't say anything about relicensing (except

maybe for the "deal in the Software without restriction"?).

As such, I think it would be safer to just include license:isc in the list.

Greetings,

Maxime.

On 08-08-2022 14:43, pukkamustard wrote:

I don't know about guile-build-system, but for some Guile packages that

use gnu-build-system, the package itself has to be added to

native-inputs when cross-compiling (this-package may be useful). I think

it has something to do with macros and the module system.

Greetings,

Maxime.

Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:

That seems to do the trick. Adding the Guile libraries to the

native-inputs makes cross-compilation work.

I will send in a V2 of patches that fixes this.

Thanks,

pukkamustard

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)

Sorry for the delayed response. I seem to have missed this mail.

Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:

I'm no legal expert, but I think I am free to distribute it only

under LGPL-3.0-or-later (and not also ISC). And I prefer to do so.

For prior cases see modules/srfi/srfi-71.scm as distributed with

Guile. The file contains a SRFI sample implementation with the same ISC

license header. It seems to be fine to relicense modules distributed

with Guile as LGPL-3.0-or-later. In the Guix package definition for

Guile only license:lgpl3+ is listed (and not license:isc).

Cheers,

pukkamustard

On 19-08-2022 15:41, pukkamustard wrote:

Sure, go ahead and distribute it as LGPL-3.0-or-later, but I don't see

how it follows that license:isc should be removed from the license list.

However, to me it seems inaccurate that you do not have to follow the

ISC by following the LGPL-3.0-or-later instead. The ISC has a line:

Even if ISC permits relicensing, I would assume you will still have to

follow that. Otherwise, you could circumvent 'preserve this copyright

notice / preserve authorship information / ...’ requirements by

relicensing it as something very permissive, which seems a loophole to me.

I am not following, how is this relicensing?

Right, I would add license:isc with an appropriate comment to the list

in the Guile package definition, looks like the license information for

that package is incomplete.

[...]

More generally, I don't see a need for computing an 'effective license'

(*) of the licenses of the individual files, given the lack of legal

experts here and as 'licenses' accepts a list, not only a single item.

(*) things like 'isc or expat + lgplN-or-later -> lgplN-or-later'.

Greetings,

Maxime.

Hi,

I think I finally understand your reasoning (also thanks to the thread

on guix-devel -

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-08/msg00167.html)and

agree.

Will send in V3 shortly with license:isc added to the list of licenses

with a comment.

Thank you for your elaborations and patience.

- pukkamustard

Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)

---

gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)

Hi pukkamustard,

pukkamustard <pukkamustard@posteo.net> skribis:

[...]

Applied. Thank you, and thanks Maxime for reviewing!

Ludo’.