Hi, For the good or the bad, we have package with multiple outputs. For instance, see ’git’ with ’git:send-email’ and others.
However, it’s not always easy to work with them using the “new style”. For a concrete example: <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66704#4>. A minimal example. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ cat /tmp/pkgs/pkgs.scm (define-module (pkgs) #:use-module (guix packages) #:use-module (gnu packages base) #:use-module (gnu packages version-control)) (define-public salut (package (inherit hello) (name "bye") (inputs (list git `(,git "send-email"))))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Then, it’s possible to add phases, e.g., --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (wrap-program (string-append #$output "/bin/hello") `("STUFF" ":" prefix (,(string-append #$(this-package-input "git") "/bin"))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- All fine! However, from my understanding, it does not seem possible to access using this “new style” way to other outputs than “out”. Because, the inputs reads, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ guix repl -q -L /tmp/pkgs GNU Guile 3.0.9 Copyright (C) 1995-2023 Free Software Foundation, Inc. Guile comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `,show w'. This program is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions; type `,show c' for details. Enter `,help' for help. scheme@(guix-user)> ,use(guix packages) scheme@(guix-user)> ,use(pkgs) scheme@(guix-user)> ,pp (package-inputs salut) $1 = (("git" #<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 73a06a652580>) ("git" #<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 73a06a652580> "send-email")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Other said, both outputs have the same label – here “git”. Then, the procedure ’this-package-input’ – under the hood via lookup-package-input and then lookup-input from (guix packages) – calls: (assoc-ref (package-inputs some-package) some-string) Therefore, since “some-string” is the same here, bang! A first proposal for fixing the issue. It’s easy to tweak how ’sanitize-inputs’ works. For instance using this patch: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) guix/packages.scm | 2 +- modified guix/packages.scm @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ (define (add-input-label input) ((? package? package) (list (package-name package) package)) (((? package? package) output) ;XXX: ugly? - (list (package-name package) package output)) + (list (string-append (package-name package) ":" output) package output)) ((? gexp-input?) ;XXX: misplaced because 'native?' field is ignored? (let ((obj (gexp-input-thing input)) (output (gexp-input-output input))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Now we get different labels, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- scheme@(guix-user)> ,pp (package-inputs salut) $1 = (("git" #<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 72f31b35de70>) ("git:send-email" #<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 72f31b35de70> "send-email")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- So far, so good! Please note that some packages then need some adjustment; e.g., see below. Next, let add to the package definition this snippet for more wrapping, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (,(string-append #$(this-package-input "git:send-email") "/bin"))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Because of the procedure ’lookup-input’ from (guix packages), the package is correctly identified but the output is still discarded. Hence this modification: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) guix/packages.scm | 1 + modified guix/packages.scm @@ -1213,6 +1213,7 @@ (define (lookup-input inputs name) ;; check package names. (match (assoc-ref inputs name) ((obj) obj) + ((obj (? string? out)) (cons obj out)) ((obj _) obj) (#f #f))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- But then it is still incorrect. For instance, we check using ’package-arguments’ and the interesting part reads: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (unquote (string-append #<gexp-input (#<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 7b7573de1b00> . "send-email"):out> "/bin")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Ok, this is incorrect and it will error when trying to build. Well, the G-exp compiler needs to be updated in agreement with ’lookup-input’ as above. What I would expect is something like: #<gexp-input #<package git@2.45.2 gnu/packages/version-control.scm:243 7b7573de1b00>:send-email> All in all, I am a bit lost inside the module (guix gexp). :-) To be continued… Cheers, simon Some adjustments here or there: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) gnu/packages/backup.scm | 2 +- modified gnu/packages/backup.scm @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ (define-public libarchive (libxml2 (assoc-ref inputs "libxml2")) (xz (assoc-ref inputs "xz")) (zlib (assoc-ref inputs "zlib")) - (zstd (assoc-ref inputs "zstd")) + (zstd (assoc-ref inputs "zstd:lib")) (bzip2 (assoc-ref inputs "bzip2"))) ;; Embed absolute references to these inputs to avoid propagation. (substitute* (list (string-append lib "/pkgconfig/libarchive.pc") --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- And thus improving the situation for packages with multiple outputs and “new style” probably means a world rebuild.
