From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jack Hill Subject: plugins as separate packages for desktop application Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:29:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46493) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hs7aF-0004mj-KJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:29:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hs7aE-0004J9-B1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:29:07 -0400 Received: from minsky.hcoop.net ([104.248.1.95]:54414) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hs7aE-0004Hd-7X for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:29:06 -0400 Received: from marsh.hcoop.net ([45.55.52.66]) by minsky.hcoop.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hs7aB-0006Gm-Jf for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:29:04 -0400 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: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Guix, I've been thinking about https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/34759 again recently. 34759 is an issue with GIMP in which it does not find plugins that are installed via separate packages in the same profile. I believe that what is going on is that GIMP is only looking for plugins in its store directory and in the user's XDG_CONFIG_DIR. I've run into a similar issue (no ticket yet) with Blender. It seems like this might be a problem common to many applications, and I'm wondering if we should have a common solution. I don't really like the symlink workaround I used in the GIMP ticket because it won't work in the context of guix environment. I think a good way forward would be to work with upstreams to have their applications support an APPNAME_PLUGIN_PATH variable and when plugins are present in a profile they would augment that variable. What do y'all think? Is this a reasonable approach? Is there something I'm missing? A better way to proceed? Thanks, Jack