GNU bug report logs -
#49565
[PATCH] gnu: glibc-headers-mesboot: Use %build-inputs in setenv phase
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
> [...]
>
> > As "libc" currently doesn't exist in 'inputs', that means "libc"
> > is searched for in 'native-inputs', which is probably not what you want,
> > given that you are cross-compiling?
>
> Are you saying that ‘%build-inputs’ is the union of ‘inputs’ and ‘native-
> inputs’? For my own education, do you know where that happens?
>
> The manual and the doc string for ‘build-expression->derivation’ only
> mention that it comes from ‘inputs’. I can send a patch to correct them.
I thought "build-expression->derivation" doesn't define %build-inputs
anymore, but apparently it does. However, note that, on core-updates
at least, gnu-build and gnu-cross-build don't use build-expression->derivation,
instead they use gexp->derivation (see (guix build-system gnu)), and gexp->derivation
doesn't define %build-inputs.
gexp->derivation doesn't define %build-inputs, but gnu-build and gnu-cross-build
do:
;; also see with-build-variables
(define %build-host-inputs
#+(input-tuples->gexp build-inputs))
(define %build-target-inputs
(append #$(input-tuples->gexp host-inputs)
#+(input-tuples->gexp target-inputs)))
(define %build-inputs
(append %build-host-inputs %build-target-inputs))
;; ^ the unio native-inputs, inputs and implicit inputs!
(define %outputs
#$(outputs->gexp outputs))
I'm not familiar with 'host-inputs', 'build-inputs' and 'target-inputs'.
They are a ‘bag’ thing, not a ‘package’ thing. You'll have to look at
'lower' to see how native-inputs and inputs are mapped to host-inputs,
build-inputs and target-inuts.
Greetings,
Maxime.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 30 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.