On 2025-08-04, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Am Sun, Aug 03, 2025 at 10:02:29AM -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
>> Any chance we could merge ncurses/tinfo into ncurses?
>> I think there are ~6 packages that depend on it, but it would trigger a
>> lot of rebuilds because of ncurses ch
On 2025-08-03, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> So to summarize:
>
> * I create a branch efraim-staging (I'm in charge this round!)
> * I grab a couple of patches from the issue tracker that will cause many
> rebuilds (for example, datefudge, xdg-utils, libtheora, zstd, etc)
> * I run it through the CI sys
On 2025-07-27, Kurt Kremitzki wrote:
> I am also a Debian Developer, and I'd really like to try to get this taken
> care of in time if possible--without getting into my whole spiel, I think
> being able to support usage of Guix as it is at any given time (rather than
> HEAD-only) is important.
On 2025-07-15, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2025-07-11, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 21:01:58 +0200
>> Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> I applied your patches, but nix/libutil/seccomp.cc was not able to
> compile on Debian:
>
On 2025-07-11, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 21:01:58 +0200
> Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
>
>> Given the current status I gave a quick and dirty try at "backporting"
>> the patches and so far I have something that compiles and I will try
>> to test it soon[4]
>
> I had to in
On 2025-07-08, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> Background:
> ---
> If we look at guix packages in various distributions, we have Guix
> 1.4.0, 1.3.0 and 1.2.0[1].
>
> For 1.3.0 we only have Ubuntu 22.04 and Trisquel 11, and the Trisquel
> maintainer did a lot of work to update Guix from 1.3
On 2025-06-21, Ashish SHUKLA wrote:
> El 2025-06-21 11:47, Andreas Enge escribió:
> My guess is because the merge happened locally (on their computers,
> because of signing requirement), they need to push to delete the
> upstream branch too, e.g.
>
> git push origin :librecast-0.11.2
Or the
On 2025-06-21, Andreas Enge wrote:
> over the past few days I see branches pop up on the main Codeberg repo
> that I think are pushed inadvertantly
...
> For instance,
...
>librecast-0.11.2
>
> I have seen some such branches persist even after their HEAD was pushed
> to master.
>
> So to me it
On 2025-06-16, Simon Tournier wrote:
> IMHO, the next actions are:
>
> a) Replace this message:
>
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> (message (format #f "You found a bug: the program '~a'
> failed to compute the derivation for Guix (version:
On 2025-06-15, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2025, at 07:29, Efraim Flashner wrote:
>> As the owner of several aarch64 and riscv64 machines, I can tell you
>> that if they are running Guix System then I have them using the -generic
>> kernel.
>
> Thanks for chiming in!
>
> This is basically
On 2025-06-03, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> > git push --set-upstream origin vagrantc-test
...
>> remote: Forgejo: User permission denied for writing.
>> To codeberg.org:guix/guix.git
>>! [remote rejected] vagrantc-test
On 2025-06-02, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote:
> Leo Famulari skribis:
>> Is this still a problem? It worked fine for me yesterday.
>
> Yes, I still get the "Forgejo: User permission denied for writing"
> error.
Same here.
> git push --set-upstream origin vagrantc-test
Enumerating objects: 44,
On 2025-05-31, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote:
> I reviewed a few patches and tried to push them to the master branch,
> but it fails with:
>
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> Total 25 (delta 20), réutilisés 0 (delta 0), réutilisés du paquet 0 (depuis 0)
> remote:
On 2025-05-13, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2025 at 09:43, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> To my take on english "deliberation" is usually focused more on the
>> process of making a decision, though possibly to make it clear and
>> explicit, we could use &qu
On 2025-05-13, Greg Hogan wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 9:32 AM pinoaffe wrote:
>>
>> If someone prefers that a GCD be withdrawn but would find its acceptance
>> acceptable, they should probably "vote" accept, even if their preference
>> is quite strong
>
> This preference is indicated by not v
On 2025-05-12, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Steve George writes:
>> Note that 'Deliberate' means to "consider or discuss", and a person
>> would "vote" at the end of a deliberation period to "to express your
>> choice or opinion". That is the standard use in English. One doesn't
>> keep a "Deliberati
On 2025-05-09, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> If you’re a committer, please consider creating an account on Codeberg.
>
> To avoid problems, I suggest you send your account name as a public
> reply to this message, in a signed message.
I use this account:
https://codeberg.org/vagrantc
live well,
v
On 2025-05-09, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> To avoid problems, I suggest you send your account name as a public
> reply to this message, in a signed message.
I have noticed that several of the replies have expired keys, and I have
not found the updated keys on keyservers.
I usually have pulled key up
On 2025-05-09, Steve George wrote:
> It's been ~2.5 years since the last Guix release, which led me to
> think we should do another one! Initially, I was just going to see if
> anyone wanted to create a release project. But, before I knew it I was
> writing a GCD! ...
Thanks for nudging this forwa
On 2025-05-05, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 06:12:25PM -0700, Felix Lechner via Development of
> GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote:
>> [...] the other, but the standard for approval seems high.
>
> Yes, the standard could not be higher, but this is a consensus proces
On 2025-04-23, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> It’s been two months since we started discussing GCD 002, entitled
> “Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg”. Its final
> version is attached below.
>
> In accordance with the GCD process, team members have until May 6th to
> participate in
On 2025-04-21, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> as the date for the GCD 003 was set to February 18th, the discussion
> period actually ended on Saturday already. I have incorporated some
> changes on Sunday to realign the proposal with GCD 002 (the Codeberg
> one), but barring any emergency changes
On 2025-03-19, Denis Carikli wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:30:29 -0700
> Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2025-03-16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
>> > On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:37:09 -0700
>> > Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> >> One could no
On 2025-03-26, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Am Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 04:54:15PM -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
>> Tested on MNT Reform2 with rk3588 module (other variants *might* work too!)
>
> I own an original Reform with the imx8mq module (I think)
...
> Would you mind sending me a
On 2025-03-18, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> And an essentially complete system config, with comments about the parts
> that can and cannot (e.g. the DDR training bits) get upstreamed into
> guix.git, with links to the relevent upstreaming work.
>
>
> https://codeberg.org/vagran
On 2025-03-17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2025-03-17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> And submitted a patch:
>
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/77090
>
> And already made one minor improvement:
>
>
> https://codeberg.org/vagrantc/guix/commit/56d1311324a410047385366df
On 2025-03-17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Might be better ways to do it, I spent a lot of time trying to figure
> out how to apply the patches as (source (patches ... or (source (snippet
> ... but instead had to use phases, as I could figure out how to
> reference the patches fro
On 2025-03-16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:37:09 -0700
> Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> I have successfully built and booted a
>> linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform@6.12 kernel on a "MNT Reform2 with RCORE
>> RK3588 Module" ... runn
On 2025-03-16, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 11:49:14 +0100
> Simon Josefsson via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System
> distribution." wrote:
>> I assume something must have written the non-free u-boot blob to
>> internal flash memory or sdcard?
Yes.
I think the eMM
On 2025-03-13, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Just pushed a "wip-linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform" branch that contains a
> kernel for the MNT/Reform family of systems.
>
> I have successfully built and booted a linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform@6.12
> kernel on a "MNT Re
On 2025-03-14, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
>> Is there duplication of issues? Yup. Sometimes one needs to get
>> forwarded to the other manually. Whee.
>>
>>
>> Do issues get automatically closed on both systems? Usually, if you
On 2025-03-13, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> I have successfully built and booted a linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform@6.12
>> kernel on a "MNT Reform2 with RCORE RK3588 Module" ...
>
> I thought RK3588 for U-Boot needs non-free board
Just pushed a "wip-linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform" branch that contains a
kernel for the MNT/Reform family of systems.
I have successfully built and booted a linux-libre-arm64-mnt-reform@6.12
kernel on a "MNT Reform2 with RCORE RK3588 Module" ... running Debian, I
know... but Guix System cannot be t
On 2025-03-04, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>> Within **30 days** following acceptance of this GCD, committers would
>> migrate all these repositories to https://codeberg.org/guix.
>>
>> For Guix itself, we would decide on a **flag day** 14 days after
>> acceptance of this GCD
On 2025-02-24, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 01:21:02PM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2025-02-23, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> > Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
>> >
>> >> The generated tarball also appears to be missing a few fi
On 2025-02-23, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
>
>> The generated tarball also appears to be missing a few files, some of
>> which seem fine (e.g. .gitignore) but some which actually cause problems
>> (e.g. missing po4a.cfg, tests/*.scm, gnu/patches
On 2025-02-19, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2025-02-15, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2025-02-11, Efraim Flashner wrote:
>>> We discussed the next release during Guix Days and I volunteered to lead
>>> the effort.
> ...
>> I may just make an attempt at makin
On 2025-02-18, Christopher Howard wrote:
> Personally, I believe the whole push to switch from "master" to "main"
> is politically correct nonsense, and a waste of time. Obviously a
> "master" branch in repository has nothing to do with slavery or
> political perspectives, but DEI proponents have a
On 2025-02-19, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Also, in reviewing the copyright and license headers while packaging for
> Debian, this raised a broader question about translating license headers
> in files such as doc/guix.de.info:
>
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/guix/-/blob
On 2025-02-15, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2025-02-11, Efraim Flashner wrote:
>> We discussed the next release during Guix Days and I volunteered to lead
>> the effort.
...
> I may just make an attempt at making a git snapshot or something, which
> I did once in th
On 2025-02-15, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> title: Rename "main" branch
> id: 003
> status: draft
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/
> authors: Liliana Marie Prikler
> sponsors:
> date:
> SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
Happy to sponsor, though seems
On 2025-02-11, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> We discussed the next release during Guix Days and I volunteered to lead
> the effort.
Thanks for working on it!
> The short version:
>
> * We need a tagged release so we can update the version in Debian and
> other distros, in CI systems, etc.
Unless th
On 2025-02-06, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Feb 2025 at 13:28, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 10:44:40AM +0100, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote:
>>> > ## Repository Migration Path
>>>
>>> do we want to take this opportunity to start off fresh without migrating
>>> the main reposito
On 2025-01-15, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:34, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
>> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists
>> on disapproving?
>
> Today, how does it happen?
>
> Well,
On 2024-12-15, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Simon Josefsson via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System
> distribution." skribis:
>> Btw, running 'herd --help' prints a lot of warnings like below. Any
>> ideas where these come from and/or how to silence them? Salsa used
>> Guile 3.0.9 and my lap
On 2024-12-15, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 01:03:05PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> > - devel as the branch for developments, master for releases and
>> > security/bug fixes
>>
>> Changing the branching model is very difficult to do. I think it is
>> better to ignore bran
On 2024-12-02, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> A new patch series that has just landed¹ adds a ‘--dependents’ flag (and
> also ‘--development’) to ‘guix build’, which makes it easier to build
> dependents when modifying a package.
Yay!
> Some examples:
>
> • guile-ssh fails to build with the latest li
On 2024-07-06, Collin J. Doering wrote:
> I am excited to announce that Guix substitutes (for x86_64) are now
> available in North America, thanks to the generous contribution of
> server hardware and infrastructure from GeneNetwork.org.
The last evaluation that actually seems to have succeeded wa
evaluation?
I pushed a commit reverting the ordering changes, which I think appears
to not trigger the rebuild:
commit ea11d3608566174c4bae70faa4f9d0c67748d2db
Author: Vagrant Cascadian
Date: Fri Nov 1 16:55:02 2024 -0700
gnu: python-dbus-python: Revert ordering change on native-inputs
On 2024-09-23, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Am Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 10:22:28AM +0200 schrieb Konrad Hinsen:
>> $ guix show -L . sbcl-websocket-driver
>> name: sbcl-websocket-driver
>> version: 0.2.0-0.df94496
>> location: gnu/packages/lisp-xyz.scm:30847:4
>> It looks like Guix picked the larger on
On 2024-09-07, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 01:29:11PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> > In Guix, the "signed-off-by" tag gives credit to the reviewer of the
>> > patch, but doesn't indicate anything about authority to push to
>>
On 2024-09-06, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 10:44:54AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> Is it just me, or is rebasing branches disconcerting, as it likely means
>> the person signing the commit is not necessarily the original person
>> pushing the commit?
On 2024-09-06, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Simon Tournier skribis:
>
>> In this picture of “merge train”, the CI workload and world rebuilds
>> will increase, no?
>>
>> Consider the two teams: science and this new core-packages. Then
>> science takes care of openblas (6000+ dependent packages) and
>
On 2024-08-09, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> test-name: input labels, mismatch
> location: /<>/tests/style.scm:124
> source:
> + (test-equal
> + "input labels, mismatch"
> + (list `(("foo" ,gmp) ("bar" ,acl))
> +"
So, facing down another round of windmills...
guix started failing to build on Debian a back in late July:
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/guix.html
First problem I fixed by updating guile-gcrypt to build against the
current versions of gcrypt... so guix actu
On 2024-07-02, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> We (Andreas, Chris, Ricardo, Romain, and myself) were having a
> discussion about what it would take to set up a build farm similar to
> what’s behind ci.guix: roughly 30 x86_64 servers, with 32-core/64-thread
> CPUs and 128 GiB of RAM. The reason for this d
On 2024-06-21, MSavoritias wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:51:30 -0700
> Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>
>> On 2024-06-21, MSavoritias wrote:
>> > On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:46:56 +0200
>> > Andreas Enge wrote:
>> >> Am Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 12:12:13PM
On 2024-06-21, MSavoritias wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:46:56 +0200
> Andreas Enge wrote:
>> Am Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 12:12:13PM +0300 schrieb MSavoritias:
>> > and as I mention in my first email I want to apply social pressure and
>> > make it clear to package authors what is happening so we c
On 2024-06-11, Richard Sent wrote:
> Guix provides both linux-libre and linux-libre--generic kernels.
> The generic kernels seem to match the upstream defconfigs very closely
> with a few minor adjustments (namely default-extra-linux-options) while
> the linux-libre kernel is entirely customized.
>
On 2024-05-07, m...@excalamus.com wrote:
> #+begin_quote
> 6.7 L37 true for Guix System as well?
> The result of running ‘guix pull’ is a “profile” available under
> ‘~/.config/guix/current’ containing the latest Guix. Thus, make sure to
> add it to the beginning of your search path so that you use
On 2024-05-06, Simon Tournier wrote:
> Start of forwarded message
> Subject: bug#69800: kcalendarcore is a time bomb
> To: 69...@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:20:43 +0100
> From: Vivien Kraus via Bug reports for GNU Guix
>
> Dear Guix,
>
> K
On 2024-04-22, Lilah Tascheter wrote:
> I've been working on a large bootloader subsystem rewrite to get
> everything working together nicer and support future bootloaders
> better. however, extlinux is being a bit of an issue.
...
> does anyone use extlinux on guix still? would anyone mind if I ju
On 2024-04-16, Julien Lepiller wrote:
> Currently, most java packages use the implicit jdk from the build
> system (ant- or maven-build-system), which is… icedtea@8. We still
> have quite a lot of old packages that don't build with openjdk9, so
> I'm not sure when we can update the default jdk…
Bu
When recently taking a look at diffoscope, I was reminded that there is
effectively no default openjdk version, you have to pick a specific
version for each package definition...
At some time in diffoscope's history, that was openjdk@12.
But there are quite a few versions to choose from:
guix
Control: severity 1066113 serious
On 2024-03-16, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2024-03-15, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 11:22:52AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-13, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>>> > On 2024-03-12, Vagrant Casc
On 2024-03-11, John Kehayias wrote:
> On Sunday, March 10th, 2024 at 9:58 PM, Vagrant Cascadian
> wrote:
>> On 2024-03-10, Suhail Singh wrote:
>>
>> > Vagrant Cascadian vagr...@debian.org writes:
>> >
>> > > but "guix pull" does not u
On 2024-03-10, Suhail Singh wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> but "guix pull" does not update the running guix-daemon;
>
> Just to be clear, however, if one were to do =sudo -i guix pull=
> instead, followed by =systemctl restart guix-daemon.service= it /woul
On 2024-03-10, m...@excalamus.com wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Mar 2024 22:29:23 +0100 Vagrant Cascadian wrote ---
>> As the one who packaged and maintains guix in Debian...
>
> Thank you for doing this work!
>
>> The guix-daemon should continue to work from the packaged
On 2024-03-06, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> I don’t feel qualified to judge, but is this the preference? Arch wiki
> advises against the Arch AUR package: “Therefore, after updating Guix
> once, the AUR advantage really turns into a disadvantage, as there will
> be many unnecessary files in
I noticed Debian is switching to 7zip from p7zip... my guess is because
7zip is actively maintained, whereas p7zip does not appear to as
actively maintained?
I am not hugely opinionated on the matter, but figured it was worth
mentioning, if anyone wanted to take a stab at it!
live well,
vagrant
On 2024-02-27, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Am Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 07:26:57AM -0800 schrieb Felix Lechner:
>> How about a 48-hour period every month in which commits are permitted
>> even if they cause "world rebuilds"?
>> We could pause the substitute builders during that period. It would get
>> rid of
On 2024-02-22, Steve George wrote:
> We're going to run some online patch review sessions. The first one is on
> *Thursday, 7th March* and you can sign-up here:
>
> https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Guix/PatchReviewSessions2024
Hoping to make it for some of these, thanks for doing it!
One sma
On 2024-02-07, Josselin Poiret wrote:
> The fact that you have to wait for Debbugs's response after the first
> mail to get the proper mail to reply to means that we can't automate
> sending whole patchsets, and have to resort to hacks like the CLI `mumi`
> tool uses. I can't just send a patchset
On 2024-02-02, Attila Lendvai wrote:
>> > for an average unix user a service is a process that is running in the
>> > backgroud, doing stuff mostly without any user interaction. you can
>> > try to argue this away, but i'm afraid that this is the state of
>> > things.
>>
>>
>> I don’t think it’s
On 2024-01-31, Josselin Poiret wrote:
> One conundrum we have for now: glibc 2.38 has a couple of new CVEs, and
> we have three options:
> 1) change glibc to track the 2.38 release branch → world rebuild.
> 2) graft glibc → bad user experience (and we're not supposed to graft
> outside of master).
So, I stumbled a bit with a fairly recently installed aarch64/arm64
system. The install went fine late December, but then I tried "guix
system reconfigure" a couple days ago, and even though it is a very
simple configuration (based on bare-bones.tmpl with grub-efi)... it
pretty much needed to rebui
On 2024-01-03, Wojtek Kosior via wrote:
> Before getting back to the discussion, please let me ask 1 question.
> Assume I submit a patch series that adds some useful and needed code and
> includes a copyright notice with a promise, like this
>
> ;;; Copyright © 2023 Wojtek Kosior
> ;;; Wojtek Kosi
On 2023-12-03, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:58:57AM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2023-11-18, Herman Rimm wrote:
>> > * gnu/local.mk: Register image.
>> > * gnu/system/images/orangepi-r1-plus-lts-rk3328.scm: New file.
>> > * gnu/
On 2023-11-18, Herman Rimm wrote:
> * gnu/local.mk: Register image.
> * gnu/system/images/orangepi-r1-plus-lts-rk3328.scm: New file.
> * gnu/system/install.scm (orangepi-r1-plus-lts-rk3328-installation-os):
> New variable.
I guess this opens in my mind a larger question of how many images do we
On 2023-11-08, Felix Lechner via wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08 2023, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> A source tree doesn't produce a derivation. A derivation is the
>> complete build recipe that captures the source and the package
>> definition, that when built by the daemon produces a store item.
>
> Okay, t
On 2023-09-14, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
> Maxim Cournoyer writes:
>> I like the 'Closes: ' trailer idea; it's simple. However, it'd need to
>> be something added locally, either the user typing it out (unlikely for
>> most contributors) or via some mumi wizardry (it's unlikely that all
>> users w
On 2023-09-15, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 14.09.2023 um 15:51 -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
>> On 2023-09-10, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>> > Am Donnerstag, dem 07.09.2023 um 09:12 -0700 schrieb Vagrant
>> > Cascadian:
>> > > I a
On 2023-09-10, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 07.09.2023 um 09:12 -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
>> I am much more comfortable with the "Fixes" convention of:
>>
>> Fixes: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/NNN
> I like the idea, but we sho
On 2023-09-13, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> On 2023-09-09, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>>> The Change-Id stays the same unless you manually edit it out of your
>>> commit message when amending / rebasing, so the commit hash may change
>>>
On 2023-09-13, Christopher Baines wrote:
> I think this has been talked about for a while [1], but I want to make it
> happen. Currently the guix-daemon is still similar to the nix-daemon
> that it was forked from, and is implemented in C++. I think that a Guile
> implementation of the guix-daemon
On 2023-09-09, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>>> Did you see my message about integrating a commit-hook similar to what
>>> Gerrit uses? It produces unique ID such as:
>>>
>>> --8<---cut here--
On 2023-09-11, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 at 16:23, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Note that the patch series adds a hard dependency on Git.
>> This is because the existing ‘git-fetch’ code depends on Git,
>> which is itself motivated by the fact that Git supports
>> shallow clones and
On 2023-09-06, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Simon Tournier writes:
>> On Wed, 06 Sep 2023 at 16:55, Christopher Baines wrote:
>>
>>> Once we know what tags to use, I can have the QA frontpage do something
>>> similar to the "Mark as moreinfo" links, so it's easy to just click a
>>> button then send t
On 2023-09-07, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
> Hi Maxim and Ludovic,
> Maxim Cournoyer writes:
>> Giovanni Biscuolo writes:
..
>>> When I asket I though the best way would be to scan for a string like
>>> "Close #" in the commit message (the committer should add
>>> such a string) but probably this ca
On 2023-09-07, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Felix Lechner writes:
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 4:08 AM Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
>>>
>>> close the bugs that are listed in
>>> the commit message
...
> Did you see my message about integrating a commit-hook similar to what
> Gerrit uses? It produces unique
below (a post-receive hook).
>
> Oh I see, thanks!
>
> This is a complex case (see below), at least not one that can be solved
> by automatically closing bug reports upon commits :-O
>
> Sorry for the confusion I added by pointing out the wrong example, a
> quick look at
On 2023-09-06, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Dienstag, dem 05.09.2023 um 19:41 -0400 schrieb brian
>> ‘* foo/bar.scm new-package (inputs): add input’
>>
>> stuff. I literally can never remember this format, no matter how many
>> times I do it. I'm reasonably sure square brackes go in there som
On 2023-09-03, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Maxim Cournoyer writes:
>
>> In the simplest case, it can be as simple as:
>>
>> $ ./pre-inst-env guix refresh -u some-package
>> [build it, try it, fix if needed]
>> $ ./etc/committer.scm
>> $ git send-email
>>
>> Since it's a single patch, there's no jumpin
On 2023-07-11, Timothy Sample wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> My current best idea is the handful of food carts at pioneer courthouse
>> square
...
> This sounds great, but I just remembered that FOSSY provides lunch!
> Maybe we should roll with that – it would mak
On 2023-07-06, Timothy Sample wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> On 2023-07-04, Timothy Sample wrote:
>>
>>> What about having a Guix lunch on Friday?
...
>> There are not a lot of things near the venue, but I will look for
>> options that are nearby and/
On 2023-07-04, zamfofex wrote:
>> On 07/03/2023 6:39 AM -03 Simon Tournier wrote:
>>
>> Well, I do not see any difference between pre-trained weights and icons
>> or sound or good fitted-parameters (e.g., the package
>> python-scikit-learn has a lot ;-)). As I said elsewhere, I do not see
>> the
On 2023-07-04, Timothy Sample wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian writes:
>> On 2023-06-29, Timothy Sample wrote:
>>> The first FOSSY (Free and Open Source [Software] Yearly) conference
>>> is coming up in two weeks! It’s being hosted in Portland, OR by the
>>> Softw
On 2023-06-29, Timothy Sample wrote:
> The first FOSSY (Free and Open Source Yearly) conference is coming up in
> two weeks! It’s being hosted in Portland, OR by the Software Freedom
> Conservancy.
>
> I was looking over the schedule and I spotted a few familiar names from
> the Guix community. W
On 2023-06-24, Nicolas Graves via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System
distribution." wrote:
> On 2023-06-24 13:08, Csepp wrote:
>> Nicolas Graves via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System
>> distribution." writes:
>> IMHO LLMs for Guix are so damn not worth the effort. It will not
On 2023-06-11, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Maxime Devos writes:
>> Op 02-06-2023 om 20:02 schreef Nicolas Graves:
>>> A few months ago, Maxime Devos worked on a new rust-build-system to
>>> handle a few issues we were experiencing with cargo (see discussions on
>>> antioxidant in guix-devel).
>>> A m
1 - 100 of 335 matches
Mail list logo
