On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wur...@mdc-berlin.de> wrote: > > Thompson, David <dthomps...@worcester.edu> writes: > >> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Hartmut Goebel >> <h.goe...@crazy-compilers.com> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> today on irc, there was discussion about that Guix should be easily >>> installable and manageable in other distros being higher priority. This >>> could attract more users to ry out Guix. So I created a draft .spec-file >>> for building and installing Guix o RPM-based systems like Fedora. >>> >>> Maybe someone using Fedora may want to add a package request in their >>> bug-tracker. I already did for Mageia. >> >> This has come up several times, and I agree that we should provide >> packages for popular GNU/Linux distributions. However, Guix *cannot* >> be made available in many distros official repositories (most notably >> Debian and Fedora) because Guix violates their policies, such as: >> >> - Software must conform to the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard >> (violation: Guix introduces the /gnu directory) >> - Software must be bootstrapped from source (violation: Guix requires >> a set of bootstrap binaries that *cannot* be replaced by the distro >> without changing the hashes of every package, effectively preventing >> them from receiving binaries from hydra.gnu.org) >> >> Guix is at odds with other distros because it is a distro itself. So, >> I think what would be best is for users of these distros to host Guix >> packages in popular places for third-party packages, like Arch's AUR >> or Fedora's COPR: >> >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/guix/ >> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lantw44/guix/ >> >> What would be even better is if people *told us* when they made a >> package. I learned about these indirectly, long after they were >> originally available. > > Could we add the .spec, PKGBUILD, and debian files to the Guix > repository? I know of many projects that include the package manifests > to simplify building packages for major distributions. > > An advantage would be that we knew about these files and users wouldn’t > have to search around for the latest package sources.
That sounds like a good idea. I would welcome patches for such things. - Dave
