David Thompson <dthomps...@worcester.edu> skribis:
> Eric Bavier <ericbav...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> David Thompson writes:
[...]
>>> + (inputs
>>> + `(("python" ,python) ;; need libpython3.3m
>>> + ("python-setuptools" ,python-setuptools)
>>> + ("gmp" ,gmp)))
>>
>> Should python-setuptools perhaps go in native-inputs (this question
>> applies to the other patches sent in this batch as well)? Not all of
>> the existing python packages follow this, but maybe they should.
>> Someone more practiced with cross-compilation might know better.
If setuptools is used only to drive the installation process, then yes,
it should be native.
> I was wondering about that myself, and also whether to make the test
> suite dependencies native inputs as well. From what I could tell, using
> native inputs doesn't work the way you'd hope when using
> 'package-with-python2'. Not totally sure, though, I didn't explore it
> very much.
I wonder what the problem is. :-)
> Since there's some uncertainty, could we leave setuptools as a regular
> input for now and address it later?
Yes, that’s fine with me.
Ludo’.
