bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Leo Famulari skribis: > >> In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after guix >> pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant number of >> users who were still using the guix-daemon from 0.10.0. >> >> It seems unlikely

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Fixes . > > * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa)[inputs]: Add llvm. > [arguments]: Build LLVM Gallium drivers. I'm uncomfortable adding llvm as a requirement for our most minimal X11 system, for several reasons. Can we find a way to make this optiona

bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:52:07PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > > Removing the surprise can be […] by […] making `guix pull' able to update > > guix-daemon as well. > > That’s what is planned for “guix pull” anyway IIRC. I suspect this > would be easier if we had a daemon written in Guile. Thi

bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 04:34:34PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote: On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:12:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: Leo Famulari skribis: > In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after guix > pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant number

bug#26006: [Website] Integral update proposal

Hi, I'd like to propose some changes to the website based on my current perception of it and some comments I've read from users: Navigation bar == Bar mockup: https://multimedialib.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/guixsd-menu-2017-03-06.png The current navigation bar is growing, so I

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

Leo Famulari writes: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:58:04AM -0500, Thompson, David wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >> > Fixes . >> > >> > * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa)[inputs]: Add llvm. >> > [arguments]: Build LLVM Gallium drivers. >> >

bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:12:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Leo Famulari skribis: > > > In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after guix > > pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant number of > > users who were still using the guix-daemon from 0.

bug#25976: man page version is outdated in Guix 0.12.0 tarball

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > >> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Mathieu Lirzin skribis: >>> Alex Vong writes: > The man page version in Guix 0.12.0 tarball[0] is outdated. When running > > $ man guix

bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

Leo Famulari skribis: > In my opinion, the recent bug #25775 (Can't install packages after guix > pull) [0] exposed a sort of meta-bug: there are a significant number of > users who were still using the guix-daemon from 0.10.0. > > It seems unlikely that they have been updating all of root's > pa

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:58:04AM -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > > Fixes . > > > > * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa)[inputs]: Add llvm. > > [arguments]: Build LLVM Gallium drivers. > > LGTM. I think this patch would

bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches

On 03/06/2017 11:46 AM, Glenn Morris wrote: > Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> Leo Famulari skribis: >> >>> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by >>> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number. >>> >>> So, a commit that begins with

bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches

Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hello! > > Leo Famulari skribis: > >> The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by >> rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number. >> >> So, a commit that begins with this: >> >> gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks. >> >>

bug#25882: gcc-wrapper doesn't handle response files

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Federico Beffa skribis: > >> gcc-wrapper doesn't handle compiler/linker flags passed through >> response files. >> >> One package which recently started using such files is GHC (I believe >> since 7.10.3). For this reason we currently need to patch it. >>

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

Also, there's a newer Mesa version available (and the Mesa version numbers are now year-based). So if we change it anyway we might want to update it.

bug#25882: gcc-wrapper doesn't handle response files

Federico Beffa skribis: > gcc-wrapper doesn't handle compiler/linker flags passed through > response files. > > One package which recently started using such files is GHC (I believe > since 7.10.3). For this reason we currently need to patch it. > However, the problem is with our tool chain wrap

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Fixes . > > * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa)[inputs]: Add llvm. > [arguments]: Build LLVM Gallium drivers. LGTM. I think this patch would need to be applied somewhere other than master to avoid mass rebuilds. - Dave

bug#25852: Users not updating their installations of Guix

Tomáš Čech writes: > My expectation is that when `guix pull' is run, it should update whole > guix, not just part (guix - guix-daemon). […] > Removing the surprise can be […] by […] making `guix pull' able to update > guix-daemon as well. That’s what is planned for “guix pull” anyway IIRC. I

bug#25976: man page version is outdated in Guix 0.12.0 tarball

Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Hi, >> >> Mathieu Lirzin skribis: >> >>> Alex Vong writes: >>> The man page version in Guix 0.12.0 tarball[0] is outdated. When running $ man guix the name of the man page is guix -

bug#25953: [PATCH] gnu: mesa: Build LLVM Gallium drivers.

Fixes . * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa)[inputs]: Add llvm. [arguments]: Build LLVM Gallium drivers. --- gnu/packages/gl.scm | 8 +--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/gl.scm b/gnu/packages/gl.scm index a3862f1ec..fff0e9ab3 100

bug#25976: man page version is outdated in Guix 0.12.0 tarball

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi, > > Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > >> Alex Vong writes: >> >>> The man page version in Guix 0.12.0 tarball[0] is outdated. When running >>> >>> $ man guix >>> >>> the name of the man page is >>> >>> guix - manual page for guix 0.11.0 >>> >>> I thin

bug#25976: man page version is outdated in Guix 0.12.0 tarball

Hi, Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > Alex Vong writes: > >> The man page version in Guix 0.12.0 tarball[0] is outdated. When running >> >> $ man guix >> >> the name of the man page is >> >> guix - manual page for guix 0.11.0 >> >> I think it was forgotten to be updated during the 0.12.0 releas

bug#25969: guix-patches debbugs appears to mangle patches

Hello! Leo Famulari skribis: > The guix-patches debbugs thing causes a regression in this workflow by > rewriting the commit messages to include the debbugs ticket number. > > So, a commit that begins with this: > > gnu: gitolite: Fix shebangs in hooks. > > ... becomes this: > > bug#25966: [PATC

bug#25273: midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted

On 17-03-01 17:01:23, ng0 wrote: > On 17-03-01 16:58:41, ng0 wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'. > > > > I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken > > (as they are right now). > > My personal opinion ignored, how do

bug#25989: Fedorahosted.org has been retired

Maxim Cournoyer writes: > The fedorahosted.org hosting service has been retired since the 1st of > March [0]. We still have a few packages which origin's URI points to > it. As a result, these packages cannot be built anymore. […] > 9. libosinfo Thanks for the heads-up. I’m working on an upd