On 08/01/16 00:29, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
Here’s the review for the other 11 patches,
Thanks for all this Ricardo, all pushed now.
ben
Here’s the review for the other 11 patches, starting from the last:
> From 4ccc1fadcb67a0d296bedd51a7f73d911da4680d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ben Woodcroft
> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:13:13 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH 12/12] gnu: Add ruby-ttfunk.
> * gnu/packages/ruby.scm (ruby-ttfunk): New v
Ben Woodcroft skribis:
> On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems
>> in Guix generally aren't. For one, this is because .gem files are
>> archives whose contents are timestamped.
> I should clarify. What I meant was the cac
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> These patches are all working towards the popular Ruby web frameworks
> (Rails/Sinatra). I tried where possible to do at least rudimentary
> testing when dependency cycles arose, and fall back to the source code
> on github when the gem on rubygems didn't contain tests
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems in
> Guix generally aren't. For one, this is because .gem files are archives
> whose contents are timestamped.
I found the same problem with Java stuff. “.jar” files are archives of
the generated “.c
On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems
in Guix generally aren't. For one, this is because .gem files are
archives whose contents are timestamped.
I should clarify. What I meant was the cache .gem files
/gnu/store/ib83mg5
