I just successfully installed guixsd 0.13.0 with efi on a new HP
laptop. I found the manual to be somewhat lacking with specific details
on exactly how to accomplish this. I've added to my todo list to post
more details here.
I also had to disable secure boot (for obvious(?) and annoying reasons)
Hi! I've done this hack so I can run the Guix I'm hacking on from git
as I know some others are as well:
ln -s ~/devel/guix ~/.config/guix/latest
However, I am getting:
guix package: warning: Your Guix installation is 233 days old
It looks like it's looking at the age of the "latest" direc
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:42:45PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> > Marius Bakke writes:
> >> Leo Famulari writes:
> >>> Both programs are distributed under the AGPL, as far as I can tell. But
> >>> Artifex Ghostscript is actively developed, which I think is very
> >>>
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 01:50:13PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add Artifex Ghostscript.
>
> * gnu/packages/ghostscript.scm (artifex-ghostscript): New variable.
> * gnu/packages/patches/artifex-ghostscript-runpath.patch: New file.
> * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add i
Leo Famulari writes:
> Here are patches that allow you build groff, cairo, and cups with the
> Artifex Ghostscript.
Woo!
> +(patches (search-patches "artifex-ghostscript-runpath.patch"
> + ;; TODO:
> + ;;"ghostscript-CVE-2
Interesting, that would surely be something useful to document.
I wonder if it's possible to use GuixSD with Secure Boot. Remember,
however, that we should embrace Secure Boot and reject Restricted Boot
([[https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libby/m/embracing-secure-boot-and-rejecting-restricted-boot-
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 08:38:58PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
> > Here are patches that allow you build groff, cairo, and cups with the
> > Artifex Ghostscript.
>
> Woo!
I'm not sure what I was thinking... I forgot to actually make groff,
cairo, and cups use this a
On 05/29/2017 at 10:20 Christopher Allan Webber writes:
> Hi! I've done this hack so I can run the Guix I'm hacking on from git
> as I know some others are as well:
>
> ln -s ~/devel/guix ~/.config/guix/latest
>
> However, I am getting:
>
> guix package: warning: Your Guix installation is 233
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 08:38:58PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
> > Here are patches that allow you build groff, cairo, and cups with the
> > Artifex Ghostscript.
>
> Woo!
Actually tested and it works!
> > +(patches (search-patches "artifex-ghostscript-runpath.
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
>> + (replace 'build
>> + (lambda _
>> + ;; Build 'libgs.so', but don't build the statically-linked 'gs'
>> + ;; binary (saves 22 MiB).
>> + (zero? (system* "make" "so" "-j"
>> +
On 05/27/2017 at 12:13 Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
>
>> Chris Marusich writes:
>>
>>> Leo Famulari writes:
>>>
So, I use and recommend `guix pull`!
>>>
>>> I use it too. Statements by others in this thread that "nobody" uses it
>>> or that "everyone" is using Git are
On 05/24/2017 at 21:56 Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> Catonano writes:
>
>> 2017-05-24 18:25 GMT+02:00 Jan Nieuwenhuizen :
> […]
>>> A friend of mine is having a second look at Guix (not SD yet) and one of
>>> the most confusing things initially is `guix pull'. "When/how do I use
>>> that," he asks...
> This sample omits the most useful output, which is the summary of what
> will be done.
Just tested with the spinner so I could actually (potentially) see the summary.
It seems that "guix package" prints such a summary (yay!), but "guix system
reconfigure" doesn't. The latter just starts downl
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 07:22:18PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> > Leo Famulari writes:
> >
> >> + (replace 'build
> >> + (lambda _
> >> + ;; Build 'libgs.so', but don't build the statically-linked
> >> 'gs'
> >> + ;; binary (saves 22 MiB).
> >> +
14 matches
Mail list logo
