WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 #28796

afrepues · 2017-08-31T15:21:50Z

Motivation for this change

Personal motivation is for using it with notmuch, but as it is the latest and stable release of the library, seems to be good idea to have it in the repository.

I have used the same maintainer as there is for 2.6, but I would be glad to be the maintainer.

cc @chaoflow

Things done

Tested using sandboxing
(nix.useSandbox on NixOS,
or option build-use-sandbox in nix.conf
on non-NixOS)
Built on platform(s)
- NixOS
- macOS
- Linux
Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Mic92 · 2017-08-31T15:56:17Z

pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix

@@ -8105,6 +8105,8 @@ with pkgs;

  gmime = callPackage ../development/libraries/gmime { };

+  gmime3 = callPackage ../development/libraries/gmime/3.0.nix { };


Is it incompatible to gmime2? Or does it break applications using gmime2?

There might be breakage, yes. They have a porting document for migrating code from v2 API to v3 API:

https://github.com/jstedfast/gmime/blob/master/PORTING

E.g.: the notmuch project just went through that, so it has to be checked on a per-project basis.

I will add an explanation to the commit message.

Mic92 · 2017-08-31T18:07:24Z

pkgs/development/libraries/gmime/3.0.nix

+{ stdenv, fetchurl, pkgconfig, glib, gpgme, zlib, libgpgerror, libidn, gobjectIntrospection }:
+
+stdenv.mkDerivation rec {
+  # TODO: libidn support, PGP/MIME support, S/MIME support


Are you want to address the TODO items before the merge?

Yes, probably should have said so in the description. From a birdview it seems to me that it should be working, all the dependencies are there at least. Do you see anything missing, or that could be taken away?

According to configure this is already enabled:

PGP/MIME support: yes (via GpgME) S/MIME support: yes (via GpgME) libidn support: yes

Saw that here too.

Mic92 · 2017-08-31T18:08:21Z

pkgs/development/libraries/gmime/3.0.nix

+  meta = {
+    homepage = https://github.com/jstedfast/gmime/;
+    description = "A C/C++ library for creating, editing and parsing MIME messages and structures";
+    maintainers = [ stdenv.lib.maintainers.chaoflow ];


You can add yourself as maintainer too, if you want.

Will do that then.

Though I'd like to have some coordination with @chaoflow first.

I have not seen anything from chaoflow, since I am maintainer. You can actually only add yourself as maintainer.

Mic92 · 2017-08-31T18:08:42Z

pkgs/development/libraries/gmime/3.0.nix

+  outputs = [ "out" "dev" ];
+
+  buildInputs = [
+    pkgconfig glib gpgme zlib libgpgerror libidn gobjectIntrospection


pkgconfig is already in nativeBuildInputs.

afrepues · 2017-08-31T19:57:42Z

The reason for having the propagatedBuildInputs was that when I went to build notmuch GMime 3 would not be detected, what I found weird, but well.

Mic92 · 2017-08-31T20:02:32Z

Can you provide an example? This is pretty unusual.

This needs to be added as a separate package because the API changes in 3.0, see: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gmime-devel-list/2017-April/msg00002.html https://developer.gnome.org/gmime/3.0/gmime-changes-3-0.html https://github.com/jstedfast/gmime/blob/3fd646c95503acb0d11bf67afde1c7bdd4fcc341/PORTING

afrepues · 2017-08-31T20:09:50Z

I am trying to build one with:

nix-shell -E 'with import <nixpkgs> { }; runCommand "dummy" { buildInputs = [ (notmuch.override { gmime = gmime3 ; }) ]; }' -I "nixpkgs=$PWD"

but keep getting the error

error: expression does not evaluate to a derivation (or a set or list of those)

So I added to pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:

  notmuchGMime3 = callPackage ../applications/networking/mailreaders/notmuch {  gmime = gmime3; };

And then ran nix-shell -A notmuchGMime3 -I "nixpkgs=$PWD" and it can't find GMime 3.

I just so happens that it needs GLib anyways, and if I add it to the build inputs there GMime 3 does get detected, but I suspect that packages that don't depend directly on GLib will need propagatedNativeBuildInputs or similar.

Mic92 · 2017-09-01T05:04:15Z

notmuch explicitly requested glib:

*** Error: The dependencies of notmuch could not be satisfied. You will
need to install the following packages before being able to compile
notmuch:

  GMime 2.6 library >= 2.6.7
(including development files such as headers)
  http://spruce.sourceforge.net/gmime/

  Glib library >= 2.22 (including development
      files such as headers)
  http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/sources/glib/

So I added it.

afrepues · 2017-09-01T19:58:30Z

I looked at the definition of GMime 2.6 and it has the propagateBuildInputs with glib in it. Then I checked out the release-17.03 branch, removed that line from GMime, tried building notmuch 0.23.5, and it can't detect neither GMime 2.6 nor GLib.

The option was introduced in f4c84b3, but nothing in the commit explains why it was introduced. At that moment notmuch still had a glib as a dependency, but it was lost in the transition from 0.20 to 0.22 in commit 58771c0, with no explanation.

The correct solution seems to be getting rid of propagateBuildDependencies in gmime and fix every package that might break, but I would settle with gmime3 being as it is for now and fix packages that use it.

What do you think?

Mic92 · 2017-09-01T20:44:26Z

That is the problem of propagateBuildDependencies, it hide dependencies. You can use nox-review, if you want to what breaks, if remove propagateBuildDependencies from gmime.

oxij · 2017-09-05T14:20:20Z

Seems we did some duplicate work here (I came here from notmuch ML discussion). Notable differences I see from my expression - I dropped `libgpgerror` from the `buildInputs` as there were no references to it in the source. - I left `gobjectIntrospection` in `nativeBuildInputs` in my expression. I'm not sure about which is the correct way. Also, I think changes to `notmuch` should be in a separate PR. My changes there are much bigger (all the tests pass!) but I'm not satisfied with them yet (see discussion in notmuch ML).

afrepues · 2017-09-05T14:28:37Z

Seems we did some duplicate work here (I came here from notmuch ML discussion).

Yes, I recognize your username :)

Notable differences I see from my expression

I dropped libgpgerror from the buildInputs as there were no references to it in the source.

I hadn't looked into this, will now.

I left gobjectIntrospection in nativeBuildInputs in my expression. I'm not sure about which is the correct way.

That's the right way.

Also, I think changes to notmuch should be in a separate PR.

+1

My changes there are much bigger (all the tests pass!) but I'm not satisfied with them yet (see discussion in notmuch ML).

Can you create a MR or point to the branch where you have these changes, please?

oxij · 2017-09-05T14:54:46Z

Servilio Afre Puentes <notifications@github.com> writes:

> Seems we did some duplicate work here (I came here from notmuch ML discussion). Yes, I recognize your username :) > Notable differences I see from my expression > > - I dropped `libgpgerror` from the `buildInputs` as there were no references to it in the source. I hadn't looked into this, will now. > - I left `gobjectIntrospection` in `nativeBuildInputs` in my expression. I'm not sure about which is the correct way. That's the right way. > Also, I think changes to `notmuch` should be in a separate PR. +1 > My changes there are much bigger (all the tests pass!) but I'm not satisfied with them yet (see discussion in notmuch ML). Can you create a MR or point to the branch where you have these changes, please?

master...oxij:pkg/notmuch-with-new-gmime The patch assumes `gmime-3` as the default gmime (not included in the branch). In principle, the expression should work (all the tests pass), but I wanted to create a PR after I understood whenever all that patching in `postPatch` is really necessary with `gmime-3`. It doesn't look like it references any of those `bin/gpg` in the output which looks strange to me.

joachifm · 2017-09-17T17:49:50Z

Has been merged elsewhere

Mic92 reviewed Aug 31, 2017

View reviewed changes

Mic92 force-pushed the gmime-3-init branch from c2aa700 to 9ffc006 Compare August 31, 2017 19:22

afrepues force-pushed the gmime-3-init branch from 9ffc006 to 3866caf Compare August 31, 2017 20:04

notmuch: upgrade to gmime3

0e96744

afrepues changed the title ~~gmime3: init at 3.0.1~~ WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 Sep 5, 2017

oxij mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2017

gmime3: init; notmuch: use gmime3 #29439

Merged

8 tasks

joachifm closed this Sep 17, 2017

afrepues deleted the gmime-3-init branch October 31, 2017 20:10

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 #28796

WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 #28796

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

afrepues Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

afrepues Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017

afrepues Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017

afrepues Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017

afrepues Aug 31, 2017

afrepues Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 Sep 1, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 commented Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

Mic92 commented Sep 1, 2017

afrepues commented Sep 1, 2017

Mic92 commented Sep 1, 2017

oxij commented Sep 5, 2017 via email

afrepues commented Sep 5, 2017

oxij commented Sep 5, 2017 via email

joachifm commented Sep 17, 2017

		@@ -8105,6 +8105,8 @@ with pkgs;

		gmime = callPackage ../development/libraries/gmime { };

		gmime3 = callPackage ../development/libraries/gmime/3.0.nix { };

WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 #28796

WIP: gmime3: init at 3.0.1 #28796

Conversation

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017

Motivation for this change

Things done

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

afrepues Aug 31, 2017 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017

Mic92 commented Aug 31, 2017 • edited

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017 • edited

Mic92 commented Sep 1, 2017

afrepues commented Sep 1, 2017

Mic92 commented Sep 1, 2017

oxij commented Sep 5, 2017 via email

afrepues commented Sep 5, 2017

oxij commented Sep 5, 2017 via email

joachifm commented Sep 17, 2017

Mic92 Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

afrepues Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

Mic92 commented Aug 31, 2017 •

edited

afrepues commented Aug 31, 2017 •

edited