[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Rethinking propagated inputs?

From: Julien Lepiller
Subject: Re: Rethinking propagated inputs?
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2021 06:56:38 -0400
User-agent: K-9 Mail for Android

All inputs of a package are build-time, whether normal, native or propagated. The result may reference some of them, and these references are the run-time dependencies.

native-inputs are usually buill-time only, because they are usually programs that are run during the build (hence the need for them to be native in a cross-build).

propagated-inputs breaks this nice model by making them run-time dependencies despite the abscence of a reference.

I think focusing on the name is distracting, but maybe "dependent-inputs", since this type of input would only affect the inputs of its dependents?

Le 5 septembre 2021 06:06:02 GMT-04:00, Attila Lendvai <> a écrit :
What do you think of "build-propagated-inputs"?

We don't call things build-inputs here in Guix land, that's a no-no :P

potentially worthless two cents from a newcomer's perspective:
'build-time' and 'run-time' are well established concepts in the wider

if i were reading 'linked-inputs' in a package definition, i wouldn't
associate it to being the set of build-time dependencies.

the best name, from my admittedly uninformed perspective, would be

- attila
PGP: 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39

reply via email to

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