Re: Any clue why $GUILE_LOAD_PATH not propagated with Haunt?

[Ludovic Courtès]

"Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>> "Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> skribis:
>>>>
>>>>> Just for posterity, Dave helped me figure out what was wrong.  I missed
>>>>> putting guile-2.0 in my inputs.  Critical!  Well, once I did that,
>>>>> things were fine!
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.  However, since Haunt ships a command-line tool, we should fix
>>>> the Haunt package in Guix to wrap ‘bin/haunt’ such that the tool has
>>>> GUILE_LOAD_PATH and GUILE_LOAD_COMPILED_PATH properly set.
>>>>
>>>> Done in 4ecbf6d.  I think it should be fixed upstream though.  :-)
>>>
>>> I don't understand why this would require an upstream fix for what
>>> seems to be a Guix-specific quirk.  Could you elaborate?
>>
>> I think stand-alone commands like ‘haunt’ should ensure that they’ll
>> find their modules rather than assume that the user defined
>> ‘GUILE_LOAD_PATH’ & co. appropriately.
>>
>> This is particularly important when users are likely to use exclusively
>> the CLI (the same is also true of ‘skribilo’, ‘guix’, ‘herd’, etc.)
>
> Thanks for the explanation, I am convinced and will (eventually) fix
> in Haunt and my other Guile applications.  Does this also apply to the
> applications dependencies, or just the modules for itself?

I would include dependencies as well.

To draw a parallel, when I type ‘ls’, I’m happy it doesn’t expect me to
have libc, libcap, and libattr in $LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

> If the former, I'm actually not sure how to do the relevant autotools
> magic to make it work.

Hopefully there are several examples you could borrow from.  :-)

Cheers,
Ludo’.