Hi, thanks for the review! On 3/2/22 14:29, Maxime Devos wrote: > This is test stuff, and these binaries do not seem to be present in > 'inputs', they would be in the implicit 'native-inputs', so these would > need to search in '(or native-inputs inputs)' instead of 'inputs' to > avoid &search-path exceptions when cross-compiling: > > (substitute* '("src/testdir/...") > (("/bin/sh") (search-input-file (or native-inputs inputs) "bin/sh"))) > > Or simpler, there's a procedure for looking for 'bin/TOOL' in native- > inputs: 'which'! > > ;; the original code! > (substitute* '("src/testdir/...") > (("/bin/sh") (which "sh"))) Whoops, I forgot I made this change. > Why the change from 'which' to 'search-input-file'? The blog post that introduces label-less inputs also introduces 'search-input-file', which made me think they were both part of the "package definition modernization process". I asked on IRC if that was the case, and although I didn't get a clear answer for that, someone told me they preferred using 'search-input-file' because it raises an exception when no file is found. What do you think about that? Should I stick with 'search-input-file' or is 'which' alright? It makes sense that I'd have to use native-inputs though. My bad!