[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The package/inherit trap (was: gnu: stellarium: Enable ShowMySky.)
From: |
Simon Tournier |
Subject: |
Re: The package/inherit trap (was: gnu: stellarium: Enable ShowMySky.) |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Mar 2023 12:46:24 +0100 |
Hi,
On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 at 20:21, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr> wrote:
> Could we rename it to something like
> ‘package+replacements/inherit’? To me, that captures the spirit,
> without being overly longer.
Well, I gave a look at the code and have seen the replacement. But I
had not thought about the package transformation and the like.
>From my point of view, the best would to add a paragraph with index
entries under “Defining-Package-Variants” section [1].
However, in the light of Maxim’s explanations, the example from the
manual appears to me inconsistent:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
You can just as well define variants with a different set of
dependencies than the original package. For example, the default
@code{gdb} package depends on @code{guile}, but since that is an
optional dependency, you can define a variant that removes that
dependency like so:
@lisp
(use-modules (gnu packages gdb)) ;for 'gdb'
(define gdb-sans-guile
(package
(inherit gdb)
(inputs (modify-inputs (package-inputs gdb)
(delete "guile")))))
@end lisp
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Well, since the trap is not completely clear for me yet, I am not able
to propose a paragraph. IMHO, a paragraph here would help in mitigating
the trap. Whatever the name of ’package/inherit’. :-)
1: <https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/guix.html#Defining-Package-Variants>
Cheers,
simon