GNU bug report logs - #26170
documentation: Explanation of propagated-inputs unclear

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#26170: closed (documentation: Explanation of propagated-inputs
 unclear)
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 09:09:01 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:08:42 +0200
with message-id <20200918090842.dqv3w6h5dq4otqzx <at> pelzflorian.localdomain>
and subject line Re: bug#26170: Bug #26170 Hunting: doc: Explanation of propagated-inputs unclear
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #26170,
regarding documentation: Explanation of propagated-inputs unclear
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
26170: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=26170
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: documentation: Explanation of propagated-inputs unclear
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 08:03:32 +0100

Hello,

I presume the difference between a package’s `inputs` and
`propagated-inputs` in Guix packages is that propagated inputs get
installed to a Guix profile whenever the package is installed while
inputs are dependencies that remain in the Store. I presume libraries
the packaged program is linked to do not need to go to
`propagated-inputs` because the program is linked to the files in the Store.

For more context, I am attempting to package the GNOME Evolution mail
client which looks for evolution-data-server’s
share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.evolution.dataserver.Sources.service
at run time and thus should use it as a propagated input (I believe).

I am however confused by `info guix` where I find explanations like
“Lastly, ‘propagated-inputs’ is similar to ‘inputs’, but the
          specified packages will be automatically installed alongside
          the package they belong to (*note ‘guix package’:
          package-cmd-propagated-inputs, for information on how ‘guix
          package’ deals with propagated inputs.)”
and
“Sometimes packages have “propagated inputs”: these are dependencies
     that automatically get installed along with the required package
     (*note ‘propagated-inputs’ in ‘package’ objects:
     package-propagated-inputs, for information about propagated inputs
     in package definitions).“

I suggest mentioning more explicitly
 1) that `propagated-inputs` are automatically installed *to the Guix
profile* and not just the Store like regular inputs and
 2) that C/C++ libraries do not need to be propagated because they can
just as well be loaded from the Store *unless* their header files are
included by header files of another input package (?) and
 3) more examples like the above example for GNOME Evolution (which
however I have yet to finish packaging and submit as a patch; maybe
dconf is a better example – I presume it is also needed at run time and
not just).

This would have made the purpose of `propagated-inputs` easier to
understand.

Regards,
Florian

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 26170-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#26170: Bug #26170 Hunting: doc: Explanation of
 propagated-inputs unclear
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:08:42 +0200

Thank you both!  Pushed as 125fc37e5f32afdbd1e5fca119c9eb41e7ad8ec1.
Closing.

Regards,
Florian

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.