Re: Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check"?

2017-12-17 Thread Chris Marusich
Danny Milosavljevic writes: > On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 14:26:30 +0100 > Danny Milosavljevic wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:17:49 -0800 >> Chris Marusich wrote: >> >> > Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check", >> >> No. >> >> >or is it good enough >> > to just run "make

Re: java: switch to icedtea-8 as default JDK

2017-12-17 Thread Gábor Boskovits
Yes, we could do that, however, I would prefer to fix these if we can. 2017-12-17 15:26 GMT+01:00 Ricardo Wurmus : > > Gábor Boskovits writes: > > > Currently I cannot compile java-aqute-bndlib, > > because java-classpathx-servletapi-3.0 does not work with java8. > > This is a known incompatibi

Re: java: switch to icedtea-8 as default JDK

2017-12-17 Thread Ricardo Wurmus
Gábor Boskovits writes: > Currently I cannot compile java-aqute-bndlib, > because java-classpathx-servletapi-3.0 does not work with java8. > This is a known incompatibility between java7 and java8 definition of Map, > affecting multiple projects. > I will focus on fixing that for now, and file a

New Hungarian PO file for 'guix-packages' (version 0.14.0)

2017-12-17 Thread Translation Project Robot
Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'guix-packages' has been submitted by the Hungarian team of translators. The file is available at: http://translationproject.org/latest/guix-packages/hu.po (We can arrange t

[bug#27438] [PATCH] guix: build: ruby-build-system: Install to the vendor directory

2017-12-17 Thread Christopher Baines
Hey, It's been a while since I looked at this, but I think it's still relevant. As a reminder, currently the search paths for the Ruby packages in Guix are a bit off [1], which makes it difficult to use Ruby gems with different versions of Ruby. Rubygems by default installs gems to directories

Re: Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check"?

2017-12-17 Thread Danny Milosavljevic
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 14:26:30 +0100 Danny Milosavljevic wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:17:49 -0800 > Chris Marusich wrote: > > > Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check", > > No. > > >or is it good enough > > to just run "make check" and rely on Make to build whatever nee

Re: Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check"?

2017-12-17 Thread Danny Milosavljevic
Hi, On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:17:49 -0800 Chris Marusich wrote: > Is it necessary to run "make" before "make check", No. >or is it good enough > to just run "make check" and rely on Make to build whatever needs to be > built to run "make check"? Yes. See the Makefile: all: $(BUILT_SOURCES) ch

Re: Dualbooting with guixsd not handling grub installation

2017-12-17 Thread Oleg Pykhalov
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Note that if all you want is dual-boot, this should already be possible > by defining new menu entries in the GuixSD config: > > > https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Bootloader-Configuration.html#index-dual-boot Are linux linux-arguments

Re: Why should build phases not return unspecified values?

2017-12-17 Thread Clément Lassieur
Arun Isaac writes: > Alex Vong writes: > >> I think the problem is that when the scheme standard says "the returned >> value is unspecified", it means anything can be returned. In this case, >> guile choose to return an unspecified value to avoid returning an >> arbitary value. >> >> I think the

Re: Why should build phases not return unspecified values?

2017-12-17 Thread Arun Isaac
Alex Vong writes: > I think the problem is that when the scheme standard says "the returned > value is unspecified", it means anything can be returned. In this case, > guile choose to return an unspecified value to avoid returning an > arbitary value. > > I think the answer written by soegaard i