Thompson, David (2015-08-02 15:51 +0300) wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Thompson, David > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Alex Kost <[email protected]> wrote: >>> David Thompson (2015-08-01 22:17 +0300) wrote: >>> >>>> diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm >>>> index c58d23c..f0d6f70 100644 >>>> --- a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm >>>> +++ b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm >>>> @@ -305,6 +305,10 @@ the following: >>>> fsck code device) >>>> (start-repl))))) >>>> >>>> +(define (regular-file? file-name) >>>> + "Return #t if FILE-NAME is a regular file." >>>> + (eq? (stat:type (stat file-name)) 'regular)) >>> >>> There are similar procedures in (guix build utils): 'directory-exists?', >>> 'executable-file?' and 'symbolic-link?'. So I think it is better to put >>> 'regular-file?' there. WDYT? >> >> Sure, that makes sense. Done. > > Ah, of course, I forgot about something: This patch triggers a > rebuild of *everything* now! I guess it should be applied to > core-updates. Or, the first patch I submitted can be applied to > master, and then a patch that moves 'regular-file?' to (guix build > utils) can be applied to core-updates later. > > Thoughts?
In my opinion it is redundant to use another commit here, so I would apply this patch to core-updates (taking into account Andreas' note). But I don't really know how such situations are handled. Mark should know better. -- Alex
