Hi, Leo Prikler 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’.