From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Naming of native-inputs/inputs/propagated-inputs Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:26:45 +0200 Message-ID: <878sspcahm.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87zhl52t0z.fsf@sturm.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34259) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hps0U-0004BV-5b for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 06:26:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hps0T-0007Lv-5c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 06:26:54 -0400 Received: from sender4-of-o53.zoho.com ([136.143.188.53]:21318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hps0S-0007Kd-No for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 06:26:53 -0400 In-reply-to: <87zhl52t0z.fsf@sturm.com.au> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ben Sturmfels Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Ben, > I know this is superficial, but I wonder if these names could be refined > to better communicate their use. What about: > > | Currently | Possible new name | > |-------------------+-------------------| > | native-inputs | build-inputs | > | inputs | runtime-inputs | > | propagated-inputs | profile-inputs | The difference between =E2=80=9Cnative-inputs=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cinputs= =E2=80=9D is not about whether they are needed at build time or runtime. The difference only really comes into play when cross-building. =E2=80=9Cnative-inputs=E2=80=9D must = be of the host architecture, while =E2=80=9Cinputs=E2=80=9D are for the target archit= ecture. It is correct that =E2=80=9Cnative-inputs=E2=80=9D often happen to be only = used during the build, but that doesn=E2=80=99t need to be the case. Ultimately, runtime inputs are determined by whether they are referenced in the output. This is orthogonal to whether they are listed in the =E2=80=9Cnative-inputs=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cinputs=E2=80=9D, or even =E2=80= =9Cpropagated-inputs=E2=80=9D field. I empathize with the desire to remove sources of confusion, but changing the names would blur this distinction for a superficial orthogonal property and give the wrong impression about how these inputs are used. -- Ricardo