Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi Maxim and all, > > Maxim Cournoyer writes: > >> Ludovic Courtès writes: > > [...] > >>> I believe this was discussed in . >>> Perhaps we should start from there, possibly considering a revert or >>> change of strategy of commit 482

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi Maxim and all, Maxim Cournoyer writes: > Ludovic Courtès writes: [...] >> I believe this was discussed in . >> Perhaps we should start from there, possibly considering a revert or >> change of strategy of commit 482fda2729c3e76999892cb8f9a0391a7bd37119. >

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi Danny, > > I think you’re describing the problem that others pointed out earlier > (there’s an open bug report IIRC) which is that grafting derivations do > not necessarily produce all the outputs of the original derivation (so > in one case you get a grafted ‘gl

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Danny Milosavljevic writes: >> I think we should revert that commit until we can revisit. It has >> caused enough long-standing issues and the gain of having it appears small. > > I agree. > > Though if the store key of grafts is good enough so that we could just > fine-grain ALL grafts that wo

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi Danny, I think you’re describing the problem that others pointed out earlier (there’s an open bug report IIRC) which is that grafting derivations do not necessarily produce all the outputs of the original derivation (so in one case you get a grafted ‘glib’ with just “out”, and in the other case

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi Danny, On 26.05.25 01:29, Danny Milosavljevic wrote: Hi Ludo! I think this typelib issue is exactly what was reported a couple of years ago, as you wrote. How is this different this time? What was the resolution last time? I don't know. Personally, I had never debugged it this far befo

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi Ludo! >I think this typelib issue is exactly what was reported a couple of >years ago, as you wrote. How is this different this time? What was the >resolution last time? I don't know. Personally, I had never debugged it this far before. Now, I think this is a very small reproducer! It is ve

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

On 2025-05-26 00:08, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: `guix shell --no-grafts` is the ugly work around during development of packages. I have spent months thinking about an issue I have in guile-libnotify: https://github.com/ekaitz-zarraga/guile-libnotify/issues/5 And this thread just ap

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Danny Milosavljevic writes: > (define-public m3 > (package > (name "m3") The same problem plagues GNOME apps in Guile. The right way (I think) when writing Guix packages is to use wrap-program, as discussed here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2025-04/msg00021.html https:/

Re: Problems with grafts and Gtk (and probably with most other dynamic things)

Hi Danny, Danny Milosavljevic writes: > There are multiple definitions (same package version) of the packages glib > (and gobject-introspection and python-pygobject), in the same Guix repo. So > far okay. > > But if you aren't very very careful [so basically always], you end up with > differ