"Check the formatting of the source code of PACKAGE."
(let ((location (package-location package)))
(if location
- (and=> (search-path %load-path (location-file location))
- (lambda (file)
- ;; Report issues starting from the line before the 'package'
- ;; form, which usually contains the 'define' form.
- (report-formatting-issues package file
- (- (location-line location) 1))))
+ ;; Report issues starting from the line before the 'package'
+ ;; form, which usually contains the 'define' form.
+ (let ((line (- (location-line location) 1)))
+ (match (search-path %load-path (location-file location))
+ ((? string? file)
+ (report-formatting-issues package file line))
+ (#f
+ ;; It could be that LOCATION lists a "true" relative file
+ ;; name--i.e., not relative to an element of %LOAD-PATH.
+ (let ((file (location-file location)))
+ (if (file-exists? file)
+ (report-formatting-issues package file line)
+ (list (make-warning package
+ (G_ "source file not found"))))))))
'())))
\f
guix lint --version
-module_dir="t-guix-lint-$$"
-mkdir "$module_dir"
+# Choose a module directory not below any %LOAD-PATH component. This is
+# necessary when testing '-L' with a relative file name.
+module_dir="$(mktemp -d)"
+
+mkdir -p "$module_dir"
trap "rm -rf $module_dir" EXIT
# Make sure specifying multiple packages works.
guix lint -L $module_dir -c inputs-should-be-native dummy dummy@42 dummy
+
+# Test '-L' with a relative file name. 'guix lint' will see "t-xyz/foo.scm"
+# (instead of "foo.scm") and will thus fail to find it in %LOAD-PATH. Check
+# that it does find it anyway. See <https://bugs.gnu.org/42543>.
+(cd "$module_dir"/.. ; guix lint -c formatting -L "$(basename "$module_dir")" dummy@42) 2>&1 > "$module_dir/out"
+test -z "$(cat "$module_dir/out")"