bug#61627: Cannot start a container built with `guix system container --network'.

Hi, I'm on eb87d2c4 (just updated a 412(!) days old guix server O.o) and I can confirm this is still happening (btw, this is the only problem I had in upgrading, so great job guix) Thanks! Nicolò

bug#61839: [Cuirass] Build timeouts during evaluations

Hello Guix! We often get evaluation errors for ‘core-updates’, where the build log reveals that this is due to a build timeout while building the Guix instance that will be used for the evaluation. Example: --8<---cut here---start->8--- building of `/gnu/store

bug#61841: ‘guix shell’ computes different package derivation than ‘guix build’

Look at this weird phenomenon. First, with ‘guix build’, everything works as expected: --8<---cut here---start->8--- $ guix describe Generation 247 Feb 27 2023 08:47:41(current) guix 17bd024 repository URL: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git

bug#61798: infodoc patch doesn't apply to linux 6.2

Hi Leo, Leo Famulari writes: > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 11:23:13PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> It's indeed been applied upstream. Can't we just drop our local version >> of it? > > Do I need to set the 'doc-supported?' value somehow for particular > kernel versions? It would be helpful for

bug#61684: can't compose 'with-patch' with 'with-source'

Maxim Cournoyer skribis: >> Quoting Ludo, >> >> (this is crucial for our HPC >> users, who routinely combine a whole bunch of options; you have no >> idea >> how far they go once you give them the tool :-)) >> >>

bug#61574: [PATCH v2] scripts: repl: Extend REPL %load-path with all channels.

Hi Simon, Simon Tournier skribis: > Fixes . > Reported by 宋文武 . > > * guix/scripts/repl.scm (define-command): Before starting the REPL, > run (current-profile) which makes available all channels. [...] > +++ b/guix/scripts/repl.scm > @@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ (define scri

bug#61684: can't compose 'with-patch' with 'with-source'

Hi! Simon Tournier skribis: >>From my point of view (and what I tried stopping in the middle :-)) is > to report if the transformation makes sense or not. For instance, You stated that multiple times and there’s general consensus that reporting the issue would be great. However, as I explaine

bug#61841: bug#61255: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for the RPM format to "guix pack"

Hi Maxim, Ludovic Courtès skribis: > I’m really not sure what the impact of > 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 is, nor whether it was the only > solution to the problem. > > One thing that probably happens is that (default-guile) is now never > used for , contrary to what was happening b

bug#61684: can't compose 'with-patch' with 'with-source'

Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > >>> Quoting Ludo, >>> >>> (this is crucial for our >>> HPC >>> users, who routinely combine a whole bunch of options; you have no >>> idea >>> how far they go once

bug#61841: bug#61255: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for the RPM format to "guix pack"

Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi Maxim, > > Ludovic Courtès skribis: > >> I’m really not sure what the impact of >> 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 is, nor whether it was the only >> solution to the problem. >> >> One thing that probably happens is that (default-guile) is now n

bug#58813: [PATCH] doc: Document how to use Patman for patches submission.

Hello, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice writes: > Hi, > >> teams.scm > > I closed the bug-that-didn't-fix, but that still leaves a git-specific > command that doesn't actually facilitate git.¹ > > I guess salvaging 'teams.scm cc' into a generic 'Cc:' header generator > makes some sense? Without the $() us

bug#61852: ‘scheme48-prescheme’ is not reproducible

Hi again Andrew, It turns out that the package is not reproducible: --8<---cut here---start->8--- $ ./pre-inst-env guix challenge scheme48-prescheme /gnu/store/qkby7f4nr3lxlm16zmswmka5hgfs6spw-scheme48-prescheme-1.9.2 contents differ: no local build for '/

bug#61841: ‘guix shell’ computes different package derivation than ‘guix build’

Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: [...] >> Commit 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 turned out to have >> unintended side effects: >> >> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/61841 > > Ugh. > >> I fixed it with: >> >> a516a0ba93 gexp: computed-file: Do not honor %guile-for-bu

bug#61732: "Unbound variable: %build-inputs

Hi Wicki, "Wicki Gabriel (wicg)" skribis: > Sorry, that last email was sent a little too early. > > > I tried said cross-compilation with this command: `guix build perl-gd > --target=aarch64-linux-gnu` and could provoke the same error message also > with perl-commonmark​. > > It also happens w

bug#61853: ‘guix pack’ shell tests fail

The two tests/guix-pack*.sh tests fail: --8<---cut here---start->8--- $ make check TESTS="tests/guix-pack.sh tests/guix-pack-relocatable.sh" -j5 make check-recursive make[1]: Entering directory '/home/ludo/src/guix' Making check in po/guix make[2]: Entering dir

bug#61201: bug#61749: [PATCH] ui: 'display-hint' quotes extra arguments for Texinfo.

Ludovic Courtès skribis: > Fixes . > > Previously, common practice was to splice arbitrary strings (user names, > file names, etc.) into Texinfo snippets passed to 'display-hint'. This > is unsafe in the general case because at signs and braces need to be > esc

bug#61853: ‘guix pack’ shell tests fail

Ludovic Courtès skribis: > In both cases this is because $test_directory is read-only: This in turn is due to a permission change in generated tarballs: --8<---cut here---start->8--- $ guix describe Generation 248 Feb 27 2023 16:36:12(current) guix cf9

bug#61853: ‘guix pack’ shell tests fail

Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Ludovic Courtès skribis: > >> In both cases this is because $test_directory is read-only: > > This in turn is due to a permission change in generated tarballs: > > $ guix describe > Generation 248 Feb 27 2023 16:36:12(current) > guix cf9e050 > re

bug#61841: ‘guix shell’ computes different package derivation than ‘guix build’

Hi Ludo, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > >> Ludovic Courtès writes: > > [...] > >>> Commit 68775338a510f84e63657ab09242d79e726fa457 turned out to have >>> unintended side effects: >>> >>> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/61841 >> >> Ugh. >> >>> I fixed it with: >>> >>> a516