[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Which inputs to define for 'meta' utilities?
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: Which inputs to define for 'meta' utilities? |
Date: |
Mon, 05 Feb 2018 14:21:47 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Hartmut Goebel <address@hidden> skribis:
> I'm about to package dtrx <https://brettcsmith.org/2007/dtrx/>, a script
> to intelligently extract multiple archive types. The script determines
> the archive format and calls the respective extraction tool, which it
> searches on the $PATH.
>
> 1) Should I add all required tools as inputs?
>
> 2) Should I use propagated inputs then? The executable are searched on
> $PATH.
Option #2 is a bad idea (propagated inputs should be used only as a last
resort.)
Adding the tools as inputs is only useful if there are tests that
actually run dtrx; otherwise it’s useless.
Then you have two options:
1. Let dtrx search for tools in $PATH. The downside is that it won’t
work out-of-the-box, as in “guix environment -C --ad-hoc dtrx”.
2. Hard-code the absolute file names for the tools in question in
dtrx. That way ‘guix pack dtrx’ will be self-contained, etc.
I’d prefer #2.
Ludo’.