+CC guix-devel
Hi Vagrant,
Vagrant Cascadian writes:
> On 2024-09-10, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>>> From 72c5e9e79d7f9b51508c97d5d9d3b5fda7e02a0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Vagrant Cascadian
>>> Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 17:02:02 -0700
>>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: v
Simon Tournier writes:
> IMHO, the next actions are:
>
> a) Replace this message:
>
> (message (format #f "You found a bug: the program '~a'
> failed to compute the derivation for Guix (version: ~s; system: ~s;
> host version: ~s; pull-version: ~s).
> Please report the COMP
On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 5:32 AM Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Greg Hogan skribis:
>
> > With the recent core-updates merge, and as the master branch
> > stabilizes, is there a plan or desire for a 1.5.0 release?
>
> Desire, definitely; plan? we have to come up with one.
>
> I think there
On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 4:56 PM Andy Tai wrote:
>
> Maybe this can be generalized for packages with lots of dependencies,
> say for any package A with 300 (or 1000) dependencies, when upgrading
> to a new version, add that as A-next so existing A is not touched.
> Then A-next can be added without a
Hi,
As Ian pointed out earlier, here some “guix pull” bugs:
55066
58309 closed
61520 closed
62023 closed
62830
And most of them are transient or hard to reproduce. More had been
listed in [1], it reads:
63451
63830
64489
64659 v1.4.0
64753
64963
