From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id oCCwOScTYl9EEgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:29:11 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id AIqfNScTYl+HdgAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:29:11 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2881B9406F7 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48440 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXUj-0007f0-Sx for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:29:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53968) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXUc-0007ej-LI for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:29:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50265) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXUc-0004vy-Bz for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:29:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXUc-0006nR-8A for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:29:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#26170: Bug #26170 Hunting: doc: Explanation of propagated-inputs unclear Resent-From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:29:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26170 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Received: via spool by 26170-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26170.160026288826052 (code B ref 26170); Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:29:02 +0000 Received: (at 26170) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Sep 2020 13:28:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33578 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXTj-0006m8-LA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:28:07 -0400 Received: from pelzflorian.de ([5.45.111.108]:44966 helo=mail.pelzflorian.de) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kIXTg-0006lw-P9 for 26170@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 09:28:06 -0400 Received: from pelzflorian.localdomain (unknown [5.45.111.108]) by mail.pelzflorian.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88A58360566; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:28:03 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=pelzflorian.de; s=mail; t=1600262883; bh=fPAFudlRnyDHuBygVGBd+aaSgfNPEu3cO20zf9YQRMU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=KfradOgI5ISVltzrHdqwNj549e8Na180YT250XdFiuWwrL9TYuniCom3hJLT5fj3m no2qxAnqSnJI5XdGadFQj3Qs2ZPb+wolBd1iMDipkphq3uiEAbIzQgQwMbs1xJnmjb b8sGQaFgBIK+ytgrkm80JtMg76s8IlgesTDCG2n8= Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:27:52 +0200 From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" Message-ID: <20200916132752.cfkabi2bdmgpdnm3@pelzflorian.localdomain> References: <20191203124904.lotocvk7htki2ill@pelzflorian.localdomain> <87h7s7ulo4.fsf@gmail.com> <20200909151021.dnte7uodi3gj5t6r@pelzflorian.localdomain> <87een2nh27.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87een2nh27.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 26170@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=pelzflorian.de header.s=mail header.b=KfradOgI; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.01 X-TUID: Sw9ebr3tNSoE On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 12:37:20PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" skribis: > > Another example where @code{propagated-inputs} is useful is for languages > > that lack a facility to record the run-time search path akin to the > > @code{RUNPATH} of ELF files; this includes Guile, Python, Perl, and > > -more. To ensure that libraries written in those languages can find > > -library code they depend on at run time, run-time dependencies must be > > -listed in @code{propagated-inputs} rather than @code{inputs}. > > +more. When packaging libraries written in those languages, ensure they can find > > +library code they depend on at run time by listing run-time dependencies > > +in @code{propagated-inputs} rather than @code{inputs}. > > I’m not convinced about this hunk; it uses imperative tense towards the > reader to state the same thing no? The difference is “When packaging libraries”. I suppose the intention is that propagated-inputs be declared as part of library packages and not as part of the application using those libraries. I am unsure if I understand correctly if “When packaging libraries” is not explicitly stated. Regards, Florian