iyzs...@member.fsf.org (宋文武) skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Pulseaudio also propagates a few things.
> Yes, I think it should be splited into “out” and “dev”, if we can make
> only the “dev” output propagating libcap and gdbm.
Yeah.
>> Two things here:
>>
>> • Back in the day, I couldn’t think of a situation where it would make
>> sense for ‘propagated-inputs’ to be different from
>> ‘propagated-user-env-packages’ (at the time, the latter was little
>> known so in practice people had to install dependencies by
>> themselves.) So in Guix I chose to have just one.
> In nix ‘propagated-build-inputs’ is propagations and ‘inputs’ for building
> while ‘propagated-user-env-packages’ is propagations for profile.
> In guix ‘propagated-inputs’ is propagations for both building and profile
> and at the same time is ‘inputs’ for building.
Yes.
> I agree that propagations for building or for profile is the same thing,
> and there’re some runtime only dependencies worthing treating as
> non-inputs (eg: adwaita-icon-themes, plugins for gstreamer).
Yes, though I would not worry about these “non-inputs” for now.
> How about seperating propagations from ‘propagated-inputs’?
> This requires listing some packages twice, but I think it will be more
> clear considering ‘inputs’ are for building the whole package while
> ‘propagations’ are (should be) per-output.
>
> eg:
> (package
> (name "pulseaudio")
> (outputs '("out" "include" "lib" "dev"))
> (inputs
> `(("libpcap" ,libcap)
> ("gdbm" ,gdmb)
> ...))
> (propagations
> #:output "dev"
> `(("pulseaudio:include" ,pulseaudio "include")
> ("pulseaudio:lib" ,pulseaudio "lib")
> ("libpcap" ,libpcap)
> ("gdbm" ,gdbm)))
> ...)
Sure. There’s a years-old example in ‘TODO’, even. :-)
The syntax cannot be exactly like what you suggest, but it could be
along the lines of what’s in ‘TODO’:
(propagated-inputs
`(((("i1" ,p1 "o1")
("i2" ,p2))
=> "include")
("i3" ,p3)))
>> • I found the ‘nix-support’ trick (that is, having high-level
>> information on the build side) kind of hacky, which is why this
>> information is solely on the build side in Guix. This is what
>> allows higher-level functionality such as --search-paths to be
>> implemented on the host side.
>>
>> OTOH, things like <http://bugs.gnu.org/22138> could be more easily
>> addressed if all the info was already on the build side.
> Agree :-)
With which part? :-)
>> Anyway, what do you think would be the best way to avoid “profile
>> pollution” with the GNOME meta-package?
> I think, for now:
>
> From 7206310f7320ed99eabd7f774a083c7b1f78c81f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6?= <iyzs...@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:17:48 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: nautilus: Don't propagate gtk+.
>
> This reduces "profile pollution" of the 'gnome' meta package.
> See <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-03/msg00283.html>.
>
> * gnu/packages/gnome.scm (nautilus): Move gtk+ from propagated-inputs to
> inputs.
Please move the sentence “This reduces …” to a comment in the code.
Otherwise LGTM!
Thanks,
Ludo’.
