[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build
From: |
Christopher Rodriguez |
Subject: |
bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Dec 2021 16:38:56 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/78.15.0 |
Ah, I see. That makes sense.
However, I don't think we need to necessarily use all of 'beets' inputs
as inputs for 'beets-bandcamp', because it will build fine with just the
inputs listed. I know it isn't DRY, but it seems like the most efficient
way to define the package might be to simply define the packages it is
expecting to see, and only those packages: That way, should someone
install 'beets' and then 'beets-bandcamp' at a later time, they don't
need to download unused inputs (like, for instance, 'python-rarfile').
That said, I suppose at least 'beets' needs to be a propagated-input for
'beets-bandcamp', because IIUC the main difference between the
propagated-inputs and inputs is that inputs are used only at build time
(like 'BuildRequires' in RPM), whereas propagated-inputs are pulled in
as installed dependencies (like 'Requires' in RPM). 'beets' would need
to be a propagated-input because 'beets-bandcamp' is a plugin for
'beets', and requires 'beets' to function as expected. Is that correct?
If so, I am unsure why the other originally propagated-inputs were
listed as such when they weren't needed for beets to function. I just
built beets-bandcamp with everything listed as a propagated-input in my
patch moved to an input, and it built fine. Is there a way I could
install that built version to test it, to ensure none of the inputs need
to be propagated-inputs (aside from 'beets')?
Please let me know if I'm way off base here; I'm very new to packaging
in GNU/Guix! (And thank You for the help while I learn!)
As for the GUIX_PYTHONPATH and GUIX_BEETSPATH idea, I would love to
implement something like that here, but I am running against my
inexperience here, and was unable to find useful docs on defining PATHs
or 'wrap-program' (I haven't looked exhaustively yet, but only have so
much time in the day to do so, unfortunately).
Could You point me to some resources to explain the mechanisms involved
in defining PATHs, or on the 'wrap-program' function? I am more than
willing to learn.
Sorry if I'm asking a lot of questions; I'm excited to be a part of this
project!
OpenPGP_0x1102102EBE7C3AE4.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/20
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, zimoun, 2021/12/20
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/21
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/21
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build,
Christopher Rodriguez <=
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/22
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/22
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Maxime Devos, 2021/12/22
- bug#52684: [BUG] Multiple Packages Failing to Build, Christopher Rodriguez, 2021/12/27