[bug#47824] [PATCH 0/3] Happy hacking in the Spring 2021 LGJ

["Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>]

Hi,

Leo Prikler <leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at> skribis:

> Am Mittwoch, den 05.05.2021, 16:16 +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>> Hi Leo,
>> 
>> On a cursory look, all three patches LGTM.
>> 
>> One nit:
>> 
>> > +                   "exec "
>> > +                   (assoc-ref inputs "guile-runtime")
>> > +                   "/bin/guile " args)))
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> >         ("guile" ,guile-3.0)
>> >         ("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)
>> >         ("texinfo" ,texinfo)))
>> > -    (propagated-inputs
>> > -     `(("guile-sdl2" ,guile3.0-sdl2)))
>> > +    (inputs
>> > +     `(("guile-sdl2" ,guile3.0-sdl2)
>> > +       ("guile-runtime" ,guile-3.0)))
>> 
>> I think it’s best to not play trick with labels, and to always use
>> the
>> package name as the label (to facilitate migration on the day where
>> we
>> get rid of labels, who knows…).
>> 
>> A common pattern for the case above is to provide “guile” both as
>> native
>> input and input, and to write:
>> 
>>   (assoc-ref (or native-inputs inputs) "guile")
> What I'm doing here is the exact opposite.  I don't want the
> omnipresent native-input guile to shadow the guile I use as input,

In that case, you can unconditionally do:

  (assoc-ref inputs "guile")

Unless I’m mistaken, it won’t be shadowed by the native input “guile”
when cross-compiling.

Or am I missing something?

Ludo’.