Re: error: %ensure-setuid-program-list: unbound variable

Tobias Geerinckx-Rice writes: Hi Tobias, > Hi Roman, > > On 26 September 2024 15:00:56 UTC, Roman Scherer > wrote: >>the error seems to be gone now. I'm not sure if it is because you >>updated the commit a while ago > > Which commit was updated by Ludo' and when? This is the commit I was talk

Re: Status of python-team branch

Hi, I got 31 from the 'start' of the branch applied: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/71408#13 There are notes on the ones I couldn't get working, and the python-project build system ones that Lars was going to cherry-pick separately. I've rebuild about 100+ dependent packages. But some of these

Re: Mystery of missing 'install' phase in guile-build-system

Hi, On 2024-09-26 23:13, Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote: Hi, A piece of software of mine using the guile-build-system runs tests after the 'install' phase. A recent system update failed because there is no such phase. Looking at the Guix sour

Request for merging "go-team" branch

Hi Guix! After a few weeks of working on go-team it's ready for the final review and merge to master. My target was to update and move packages from (gnu packages golang) to logical submodules and prepare bare minimal refreshed amount to complete Prometheus packaging. * Covered issues -

Mystery of missing 'install' phase in guile-build-system

Hi, A piece of software of mine using the guile-build-system runs tests after the 'install' phase. A recent system update failed because there is no such phase. Looking at the Guix source code, the 'install' phase never existed. Shouldn't every build system have that phase? Why did the same pac

Re: Status of python-team branch

> > Same for me, starting resolving rebase conflict. > Hi Guixers, I would recommend cherry picking logical commits into new branches that can be quickly reviewed and merged by Guix volunteers. Steve made a list here of some logical commits that can go into new branches: https://issues.guix.g

Re: error: %ensure-setuid-program-list: unbound variable

Hi Roman, On 26 September 2024 15:00:56 UTC, Roman Scherer wrote: >the error seems to be gone now. I'm not sure if it is because you >updated the commit a while ago Which commit was updated by Ludo' and when? (I'm responsible for the setuid-* removal and any possible breakage, hence my interes

Re: Status of python-team branch

Hi, Same for me, starting resolving rebase conflict. I'm finishing go-team right now and will have some free time on Sat. Thanks, Oleg On Thu, 26 Sept 2024, 16:01 Christopher Baines, wrote: > Sharlatan Hellseher writes: > > > Hi, > > > > I may volunteer myself to that > > - rebase on current

weird mumi message dupe/drop?

so, I just tried to apply v3 of issue #73202, but it failed, first trying to apply a regular email, then completely dropping the last patch (in email order, so actually patch 12/14). looking into it, it seems like the raw messages aren't indexed properly? when downloading the raw mbox for either @1

Re: error: %ensure-setuid-program-list: unbound variable

Ludovic Courtès writes: Hi Ludo, the error seems to be gone now. I'm not sure if it is because you updated the commit a while ago, or because I also cleaned ~/.cache/guix folder while trying to fix this. Thanks for your help. > Hi, > > Roman Scherer skribis: > >> I have a guix.scm file in whi

Re: Status of python-team branch

Sharlatan Hellseher writes: > Hi, > > I may volunteer myself to that > - rebase on current master > - resolve conflicts > - apply pending patches from issues > - push for testing > - merge to master > > Is anyone interested in rebasing the branch? Are you still looking at rebasing python-team?

Re: Rebuilding a package after removing a build step

Hi, Konrad Hinsen skribis: > Unfortunately, when there are several packages with identical name and > version number in two channels, Guix silently chooses one of them. > It would probably be more useful to emit a warning. I believe that’s already the case. Specifically, if there are several p

Re: Custom sha256 updaters ?

On 2024-09-26 15:43, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Nicolas Graves skribis: > >> Has there already been some discussion about custom hash updaters? I >> have written an import module for libreoffice, and we have access to the >> sha256 hash in for example >> >> https://download.documentfoundati

Re: error: %ensure-setuid-program-list: unbound variable

Hi, Roman Scherer skribis: > I have a guix.scm file in which I depend on the guix package. > > When building this package with autotools I see the following error when > compiling my guile modules: > > error: %ensure-setuid-program-list: unbound variable This sounds like an ABI mismatch. ‘%ens

Re: Reconfigure fails after merge of core-updates

Hi, Felix Lechner via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." skribis: > Hints about why 'make check' fails with status 2 for > guix-1.4.0-25.e85f52e would be especially appreciated. Thanks! The dump of ‘test-suite.log’ (from the ‘guix’ package) that you posted lacks the lin

Re: Custom sha256 updaters ?

Hi, Nicolas Graves skribis: > Has there already been some discussion about custom hash updaters? I > have written an import module for libreoffice, and we have access to the > sha256 hash in for example > > https://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/24.2.6/libreoffice-24.2.6.2.tar.x

Re: shepherd: PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG is m4_require'd but not m4_defun'd

Hi, Attila Lendvai skribis: > $ ./configure > [...] > ./configure: line 7268: PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG: command not found > configure: error: pkg-config is missing, please install it > $ pkg-config --version > 0.29.2 > > > then i tried to autoconf it: > > > $ autoconf > configure.ac:52: warning: PKG_

Re: [PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add “Deprecation Policy” section.

Hi Janneke, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen skribis: >> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/72840 > > Thanks, looks good to me! As a side remark: It would be nice if > upgrading of config.scm / home.scm could be automated. It would be great, indeed. > Anyway, I do have a vaguely related question. The Dezyne

Re: 1.5.0 release?

Hi Greg, Greg Hogan skribis: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 5:32 AM Ludovic Courtès wrote: [...] >> I think there should be a team of ~4 volunteers who can commit to focus >> on it for, say, 2–5 months¹ (the shorter the better, but we have to >> prepare for extra time). > > That seems like a length

Re: Shepherd and the --silent option

Hi! Dariqq skribis: > I think the issue is that the shepherd config generated by guix-home uses > > (action 'root 'daemonize) > > which is deprecated in 0.10 and on the devel branch seems to create a > new action rather than invoking it. (So no error too). > > When I change to the new way > > (p

Re: ‘core-updates’ is gone; long live ‘core-packages-team’!

Hi, Andreas Enge skribis: > Am Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 11:11:14AM +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: >> The way I see it, one of the branches would be tested independently. >> The second one would also be tested independently, but on a limited >> scope—e.g., x86_64-only, because (1) we usually have mor

Re: Adding (gnu packages emulator) to games team scope?

Hello Maxim, On 9/26/24 14:00, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > Hi, > > I just sent some emulators packages, and was suprised it's not covered > by the games team. Should it be? I'd say most emulators we have there > are for emulating gaming consoles, which seems related to gaming to me > :-). > > Wha