GNU bug report logs - #32749
package-with-explicit-inputs leaks-in additional inputs

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org>
To: 32749 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#32749: package-with-explicit-inputs leaks-in additional inputs
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 12:03:10 +0200

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

Hi!

Rewriting the bootstrap on the wip-bootstrap branch I found additional
inputs in packages that use `package-with-explicit-inputs', such as
diffutils-boot0.

I would expect diffutils-boot0 to list just one extra input in addition
to gnu-make-boot0; namely the package gnu-make-boot0; however it has
many more.

To reproduce this I created a test file with two simple packages
gnu-make-explicit-inputs, gnu-make-no-implicit-inputs.

Put the attached file in gnu/packages and producing a graph for both
test packages

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
11:56:03 janneke <at> dundal:~/src/guix-master 
$ ./pre-inst-env guix graph --type=bag -e '(begin (use-modules (guix packages)) (@@ (gnu packages pawei) gnu-make-no-implicit-inputs))' | wc -l
14
11:56:22 janneke <at> dundal:~/src/guix-master 
$ ./pre-inst-env guix graph --type=bag -e '(begin (use-modules (guix packages)) (@@ (gnu packages pawei) gnu-make-explicit-inputs))' | wc -l
79
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Should `package-with-explicit-inputs' behave like I think it does, i.e.,
should both test packages list the same dependencies, or am I missing
something?

[pawei.scm (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

[make-no-implicit-inputs.dot (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

[make-explicit-inputs.dot (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Previous Next

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