From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: Note for Python packages: packages do not have "inputs" (most of the time) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 19:52:33 +0000 Message-ID: <87wpgyonb2.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> References: <580CF174.1000201@crazy-compilers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44027) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byOpE-0003c5-Vp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 15:52:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byOpA-0002HP-4R for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 15:52:57 -0400 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:50649) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byOp9-0002HH-U7 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 15:52:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <580CF174.1000201@crazy-compilers.com> 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: Hartmut Goebel , guix-devel Hartmut Goebel writes: > Hi, > > I just found some Python packages recent checked in to master, which > have "inputs" defined. > > All Python packages, please keep in mind: > > *The default for including other Python packages is "propagated-inputs".* > > guix import is wrong here, as it defaults to "inputs". Please refer to > the section "Specifying Dependencies" in info doc/guix "Python Modules". > > Thanks! > > Note: Currently specifying dependencies as "input" works by mere luck > and all these packages will fail with the new python build system. (And > I'm having a hard time cleaning up all these wrong inputs :-(( I think this is wrong. My assumption is I work with the old system as long as the new system is not in place. I see no changes which fix this, so why should I do work in advance when this must be fixed afterwards? Will the current system report packages as broken, or are they entirely broken? From my perspective this reads weird. I have not read the new documentation section, but I assumed this is not yet in place? > -- > Regards > Hartmut Goebel > > | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com | > | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible | > > >