Hello, On Sunday, March 6th, 2022 at 8:19 AM, Olivier Dion via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." <guix-devel@gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi Guix, > > I often find my self using inheritance of package to add native-inputs > > that are not stricly necessary for building the project, but are used > > for developement purpose like so: > > ------------------------------------------------- > > (define base-native-inputs (list ...)) > > (define my-package > > (package > > ... > > (native-inputs base-native-inputs) > > ...)) > > ;; Developers version > > (package > > (inherit my-package) > > (native-inputs > > (append base-native-inputs > > (list gdb lcov)))) > > ------------------------------------------------- > > I guess this is the correct way of doing it or perhaps I should put gdb > > and lcov in the base-native-inputs?. But I was thinking that perhaps > > something like `(developer-inputs (list gdb lcov))` would be better, > > since these inputs are not stricly necessary for building the package. Can you give a bit more detail about what the use case is for adding developer tools as inputs? The inheritance you describe seems more cumbersome than simply doing `guix shell gdb lcov -D my-package` to enter a development environment with gdb and lcov present, while also being a bit more limited when there are multiple tools with a similar function. In the above example, imagine if a developer wants to debug my-package using lldb instead of gdb--the developer-inputs would require transforming the package definition, but the ad-hoc invocation could simply be `guix shell lldb lcov -D my-package`. Cheers, Kaelyn > > Regards, > > old > > -- > > Olivier Dion > > Polymtl