Danny Milosavljevic writes:
>> No, it is not. lzo was number 2 in the original patch couple and is
>> still intended to be applied as such.
>
> I see what you mean but I really doubt that patchwork can see it (also
> because of the subject it probably will replace the entire set by just this
>
> No, it is not. lzo was number 2 in the original patch couple and is
> still intended to be applied as such.
I see what you mean but I really doubt that patchwork can see it (also because
of the subject it probably will replace the entire set by just this package).
Danny Milosavljevic writes:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 20:22:00 +
> ngillm...@runbox.com wrote:
>
>> Danny Milosavljevic writes:
>>
>> Okay, there was one character which I did miss. this fixed it. Here's
>> the updated patch including the python2 variant, which yours did not
>> have.
>
> Right.
On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 20:22:00 +
ngillm...@runbox.com wrote:
> Danny Milosavljevic writes:
>
> Okay, there was one character which I did miss. this fixed it. Here's
> the updated patch including the python2 variant, which yours did not
> have.
Right.
Your new patch is missing imports for the
Danny Milosavljevic writes:
Okay, there was one character which I did miss. this fixed it. Here's
the updated patch including the python2 variant, which yours did not
have.
From 21672f816d1d685a18f1c4bd9d4a6e0766655a66 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: ng0
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:08:21 +
Sub
python-lzo + python-lz4
* gnu/packages/compression.scm (python-lzo, python-lz4): New variables.
Co-authored-by: ng0
---
gnu/packages/compression.scm | 64
1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/compression.scm b/gnu/packages/comp
