[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Design decision behind inputs/native-inputs/propagated-inputs

From: Ben Woodcroft
Subject: Re: Design decision behind inputs/native-inputs/propagated-inputs
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 07:42:53 +1000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1

Hi Steven,

On 22/01/16 02:08, Steven Allen wrote:
On 01-21-16, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
In short, the distinction between ‘native-inputs’ and ‘inputs’ exists
solely because Guix supports cross-compilation.  Otherwise it would be

Propagated inputs are a way to manually say: “I want this package to
automatically pull in those other packages.”  This is necessary in the
cases given above.

Does this clarify the rationale?
I believe I understand what they mean and how they solve the problem. My
question is more "why autodetect runtime dependencies"?
Can I ask, what do you mean by "autodetect" ?


reply via email to

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