[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Any clue why $GUILE_LOAD_PATH not propagated with Haunt?

From: Thompson, David
Subject: Re: Any clue why $GUILE_LOAD_PATH not propagated with Haunt?
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 10:35:23 -0500

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> skribis:
>>>> Just for posterity, Dave helped me figure out what was wrong.  I missed
>>>> putting guile-2.0 in my inputs.  Critical!  Well, once I did that,
>>>> things were fine!
>>> Indeed.  However, since Haunt ships a command-line tool, we should fix
>>> the Haunt package in Guix to wrap ‘bin/haunt’ such that the tool has
>>> Done in 4ecbf6d.  I think it should be fixed upstream though.  :-)
>> I don't understand why this would require an upstream fix for what
>> seems to be a Guix-specific quirk.  Could you elaborate?
> I think stand-alone commands like ‘haunt’ should ensure that they’ll
> find their modules rather than assume that the user defined
> ‘GUILE_LOAD_PATH’ & co. appropriately.
> This is particularly important when users are likely to use exclusively
> the CLI (the same is also true of ‘skribilo’, ‘guix’, ‘herd’, etc.)

Thanks for the explanation, I am convinced and will (eventually) fix
in Haunt and my other Guile applications.  Does this also apply to the
applications dependencies, or just the modules for itself?  If the
former, I'm actually not sure how to do the relevant autotools magic
to make it work.

- Dave

reply via email to

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