ources use
> GPLv2+.
To me that means the intent is to make it GPLv3+, so I’d write GPLv3+.
> From 89f13d2ee5ad10e4a6fd6df71d7584d4f7e09176 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nikita Karetnikov
> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 07:48:14 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add GNU Fdisk.
.html
From 89f13d2ee5ad10e4a6fd6df71d7584d4f7e09176 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikita Karetnikov
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 07:48:14 +
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add GNU Fdisk.
* gnu/packages/fdisk.scm: New file.
* Makefile.am (MODULES): Add it.
---
Makefile.am|1 +
gnu/packages/f
Hi,
"Jason Self" skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès said:
>> Yes, I’ve been wondering too. The thing is, while most are purely
>> declarative like this, some, like those in base.scm, are trickier
>> and definitely copyrightable. In base.scm, the composition of
>> packages in the bootstrap phase may
Ludovic Courtès said:
> Yes, I’ve been wondering too. The thing is, while most are purely
> declarative like this, some, like those in base.scm, are trickier
> and definitely copyrightable. In base.scm, the composition of
> packages in the bootstrap phase may also be copyrightable in itself.
I s
Hi,
So, what's the policy on copyright statements?
I'm not a lawyer that's why I think that it's better to be safe than
sorry (i.e. to use a copyright statement).
Nikita
"Jason Self" skribis:
> I left it out because as a series of facts (package name, version,
> URL, hash, dependencies, etc.) I'm not sure that these files are even
> copyrightable to begin with.
Yes, I’ve been wondering too. The thing is, while most are purely
declarative like this, some, like t
Nikita Karetnikov said:
> Add a copyright notice.
I left it out because as a series of facts (package name, version,
URL, hash, dependencies, etc.) I'm not sure that these files are even
copyrightable to begin with.
"When there is only one way to express an idea or function, then
everyone is free
Hi!
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
> I have some doubts regarding this line:
>
> (arguments '(#:configure-flags '("CC=gcc")))
>
> Ludo, is it needed?
It depends on the package, but packages that use Autoconf normally don’t
need it.
> Ludo is right. 'parted' is the next thing I'm going to package.
Hi,
Jason, could you also fix the following?
1. Split the description into several lines. (I usually use Emacs'
'ESC q' for this purpose.)
2. Fix the typo in the description (i.e. "GNU fdisk GNU fdisk").
3. Remove the trailing space from the description.
4. Change the formatting according to t
Hi Jason,
Thanks for the patch!
I believe there are two issues here:
> + (sha256
> + (base32
> +
> "MM4TMM3EHA2GIZTGGEYWGNBRGIYTAZTGMY4TSNBXGQZGKOLGHEYGCNZSMRTGIY3CGA2DQMLCMNRTIYRVGMYDEMRTMVSDGNJRGFTGENI="
This is not a valid nix-base32 string. It should be shorter, like
I hope that I've done this correctly.
diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am
index b57e7db..d5a4111 100644
--- a/Makefile.am
+++ b/Makefile.am
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ MODULES = \
distro/packages/cpio.scm \
distro/packages/ddrescue.scm \
distro/packages/ed.scm \
+ distro/packages/fdisk
11 matches
Mail list logo