Support make var expansion in pkg_tar

[dmarquez-splunk]

We have a use case where we need to use variables from the toolchain's make vars in order to interpolate paths passed to remap_paths attribute in pkg_tar. Currently this is unsupported and results in the files not being found. Is this something that we'd be open to supporting?

[dmarquez-splunk]

@aiuto I'd like to push a PR for this and would like to get feedback. Currently I do not have permissions to push a feature branch.

[tonyaiuto]

We don't build on feature branches.
Clone the repo
push to your repo
then do the pull request across forks

[tonyaiuto]

We have a use case where we need to use variables from the toolchain's make vars in order to interpolate paths passed to remap_paths attribute in pkg_tar. Currently this is unsupported and results in the files not being found. Is this something that we'd be open to supporting?

It seems like something people would want to do, but how do you propose making it work. There is not "the" toolchain, there are toolchains all over the place. I may make a package that includes targets built under transitions, so I might have toolchains for both C++ and Rust, support differint machine architectures.

Why don't you propose a design for the feature first.

[aiuto]

Please don't just say it would not be too much effort. Please explain how the new feature would work so people can evaluate it.

…

On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 12:09 PM dmarquez-splunk ***@***.***> wrote: I didn't suspect it'd require too much effort. I've been working with these <#950> changes on my local which seem to satisfy our use case. Please have a look at your earliest convenience — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#947 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXHHHBOW722UCGJJXVPPS32Y7SMNAVCNFSM6AAAAAB2H74RDSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOOJXGM3DCNBVGY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <bazelbuild/rules_pkg/issues/947/2797361456 ***@***.***> *dmarquez-splunk* left a comment (bazelbuild/rules_pkg#947) <#947 (comment)> I didn't suspect it'd require too much effort. I've been working with these <#950> changes on my local which seem to satisfy our use case. Please have a look at your earliest convenience — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#947 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXHHHBOW722UCGJJXVPPS32Y7SMNAVCNFSM6AAAAAB2H74RDSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOOJXGM3DCNBVGY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <bazelbuild/rules_pkg/issues/947/2797361456 ***@***.***>

[dmarquez-splunk]

Oh of course. I by no means meant that as a reason to not write up a proposal but rather just an informal estimate for the work required (which can be completely wrong). I will spend some time on this early next week.