guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#65062] [PATCH core-updates 1/1] packages: Specify output in input l


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: [bug#65062] [PATCH core-updates 1/1] packages: Specify output in input label when it's not "out".
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2023 00:03:53 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi,

Hilton Chain <hako@ultrarare.space> skribis:

>> Hilton Chain <hako@ultrarare.space> skribis:
>>
>> > * guix/packages.scm (add-input-label): Specify output when it's not "out".
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > +         (list (string-append (package-name package) ":" output)
>> > +               package
>> > +               output)))
>>
>> The Grand Plan¹ is to eventually get rid of labels entirely (or almost:
>> there’d still be input alists on the build side).  As such, I thought we
>> shouldn’t worry too much about what the actual label is.  But perhaps
>> you stumbled upon situations where this is a problem?  Could you
>> describe them?

[...]

> My main concern is that currently modify-inputs, this-package-input
> and this-package-native-input operate on input labels and there would
> be duplicated labels if adding multiple outputs of a package.
>
> For modify-inputs, I think there's no approach to solve this without
> also specifying labels in inputs.

Yes, good point.

Another, more radical approach, would be to change semantics, whereby
(inputs (list p)) would mean that all the outputs of ‘p’, not just
“out”, are taken as inputs.  That’d simplify inputs at the expense of
precision, and (this-package-input NAME) would always be unambiguous.

But maybe that’s too radical and uncertain.

So all things considered, I guess you’re right and we should do what you
propose.

Minor issues:

> --- a/guix/packages.scm
> +++ b/guix/packages.scm
> @@ -626,7 +626,13 @@ (define (add-input-label input)
>      ((? package? package)
>       (list (package-name package) package))
>      (((? package? package) output)                ;XXX: ugly?
> -     (list (package-name package) package output))
> +     (if (string=? output "out")
> +         ;; (package "out") => ("package" package "out")
> +         (list (package-name package) package output)
> +         ;; (package "output") => ("package:output" package "output")
> +         (list (string-append (package-name package) ":" output)
> +               package
> +               output)))

Rather write it as two separate clauses, without comments:

  (((? package? package) "out")
   …)
  (((? package? package) output)
   …)

Could you also add a test case in ‘tests/packages.scm’ that would look
up inputs by those labels?

Thanks,
Ludo’.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]