Hi,
I get the following on guix package -u . with guix describe being
Generation 56 Feb 24 2020 16:19:39(current)
guix eab07e7
repository URL: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
branch: master
commit: eab07e78b691ae7866267fc04d31c7c3ad6b0eeb
guix substitute: error: hos
Hi,
I've been trying to debug AVR toolchain errors found in here:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2020-02/msg00204.html
I'm not experienced enough to know all that's going on here and I need some
assistance to make everything work.
I'm working on QMK-Firmware (helix keyboard spec
Dear Simon,
I'm not using GNU Guix anymore so I'm afraid I can't answer your question.
Best,
Albin
On 2020-02-18 15:26, zimoun wrote:
> Dear,
>
> The bug #23286 is more than 3 years old.
> What is the status?
> Any progress? :-)
>
>
> [1] https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=23286
>
* gnu/packages/vim.scm (vim-full)[description]: New field. Explain what
vim-full provides over vim.
---
gnu/packages/vim.scm | 19 ++-
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/vim.scm b/gnu/packages/vim.scm
index 67f245b26d..a94a677b25 100644
---
Dear,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 18:29, Martin Flack wrote:
> I think the problem was I had copied gnu/packages/databases.scm to a custom
> GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH in order to apply a patch from the mailing lists, without
> keeping it up-to-date with the rest of the contents of the file as guix had
> f
Ah, you can close this, sorry!
I think the problem was I had copied gnu/packages/databases.scm to a
custom GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH in order to apply a patch from the mailing lists,
without keeping it up-to-date with the rest of the contents of the file as
guix had further commits over time. I know there
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020, Leo Famulari wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:44:30AM -0500, Jack Hill wrote:
Hi Guix,
This is an enhancement request: I think we should explain what vim-full
provides over vim in the package description. What do you think?
Absolutely! Who will write the patch? :)
I
Hi Arun,
On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 20:10, Arun Isaac wrote:
> > But as we have talked before, there is an issue about the upstream
> > test suite of the package (point 1. of [1]). So I am investigating...
>
> Ah, I understand our miscommunication now. You have been talking about
> point 1 (bug in u
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:44:30AM -0500, Jack Hill wrote:
> Hi Guix,
>
> This is an enhancement request: I think we should explain what vim-full
> provides over vim in the package description. What do you think?
Absolutely! Who will write the patch? :)
Dear,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 06:45, Martin Flack wrote:
> 1 package in profile
>
> Backtrace:
>1 (primitive-load "/home/mflack/.config/guix/current/bin/…")
> In guix/ui.scm:
> 1824:12 0 (run-guix-command _ . _)
>
> guix/ui.scm:1824:12: In procedure run-guix-command:
> error: lmdbx
On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 22:15 -0500, Julien Lepiller wrote:
> Le 24 février 2020 22:01:45 GMT-05:00, Jesse Gibbons <
> jgibbons2...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > I have a laptop with two drives. A few days ago, when I ran `df -h`
> > it
> > outputs:
> > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> >
Oops wrong shortcut, sorry!
> I’d rather go for #2. To do that, we could modify the ‘set-paths’ phase
> to manually remove glibc from C_INCLUDE_PATH (fragile), or we could
> modify GCC (perhaps removing the ‘remove_duplicates’ call for SYSTEM).
>
> Either way, this wouldn’t work well with ‘guix
Hey!
> I’d rather go for #2. To do that, we could modify the ‘set-paths’ phase
> to manually remove glibc from C_INCLUDE_PATH (fragile), or we could
> modify GCC (perhaps removing the ‘remove_duplicates’ call for SYSTEM).
>
> Either way, this wouldn’t work well with ‘guix environment’, where gl
Le 24 février 2020 22:01:45 GMT-05:00, Jesse Gibbons a
écrit :
>I have a laptop with two drives. A few days ago, when I ran `df -h` it
>outputs:
>Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
>none 16G 0 16G 0% /dev
>/dev/sdb1 229G 189G 29G 87% /
>/dev/sda1
14 matches
Mail list logo
