Hi Ludo,

You closed this but the issue is still there, no? :-)

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 17:44, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> On ven., 10 mars 2023 at 09:17, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm good point.  So maybe we need to wrap after all, and also keep
>>> propagated inputs (as an example, (guix build download) uses the
>>> Disarchive modules directly, not the command.)
>>
>> I am proposing to have ’package/inherit’,
>>
>>  1. ’disarchive’: the standalone CLI with wrap
>>  2. ’guile-disarchive’: the library with propagated-inputs
>
> I think having a single package is more convenient: it would both
> propagate inputs and wrap the binaries as you proposed.

Because of this error:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix shell -C disarchive -- disarchive disassemble hello-2.12.1
Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:

[...]

ice-9/boot-9.scm:3329:6: In procedure resolve-interface:
no code for module (gcrypt hash)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

solved by adding the package guile,

    $ guix shell -C disarchive guile -- disarchive disassemble hello-2.12.1

then, I think the contrary: having two packages is more convenient.

Well, from my point of view, two packages would be consistent with other
Guix packages as pandoc and ghc-pandoc for instance.  Plain name for the
CLI and <language>-name for the library in <language>, somehow.  The
<language> compiler/interpreter propagated/wrapped only with the CLI.

Somehow, I am proposing this attached patch.