Am 06.05.2018 um 03:24 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 19:06:27 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>> I have noticed somepeople advocating for packaging Firefox in GNU Guix,
>> and since FF still has freedom issues, I see it as a no-go.
> A simple option for now is to package FF b
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 11:48:28AM +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Am 06.05.2018 um 03:24 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
> > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 19:06:27 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> >> I have noticed somepeople advocating for packaging Firefox in GNU Guix,
> >> and since FF still has freedom i
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 06:01:59 +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> Mike Gerwitz transcribed 2.2K bytes:
>> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 19:06:27 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>> > I have noticed somepeople advocating for packaging Firefox in GNU Guix,
>> > and since FF still has freedom issues, I see
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 11:48:28 +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Am 06.05.2018 um 03:24 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
>> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 19:06:27 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>> I have noticed somepeople advocating for packaging Firefox in GNU Guix,
>>> and since FF still has freedom issues
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 10:05:35AM -0400, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> Packaging Firefox as-is is not an option. In the case of their addon
> system, they encourage installation of non-free addons, which is against
> the Free Software Distribution Guidelines (FSDG), and is the same reason
> that Debian i
Am 06.05.2018 um 16:05 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
> In the case of their addon
> system, they encourage installation of non-free addons, which is against
> the Free Software Distribution Guidelines (FSDG), and is the same reason
> that Debian isn't a recommended free software distribution.
>
My aim is t
Am 06.05.2018 um 15:58 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
> I suspect that most Guix users are more technical than average users and
> would be much less bothered by a kluge for the time being.
I would be bothered by such a kludge, which IMHO is of no use.
--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel
Oleg Pykhalov (2018-05-04 21:50 +0300) wrote:
> In addion to my previous answer.
>
> Oleg Pykhalov writes:
>
> […]
>
>>> 'let-alist' is a part of Emacs (that's why it was removed by commit
>>> 469c7ce0¹). Is there a reason to add it?
>
> […]
>
>> Elpa importer could probably exclude ‘let-alist’
Alex Kost writes:
[…]
> I don't understand what mechanism you mean. Why it cannot simply be
> removed?
‘guix import elpa’ should remove ‘let-alist’ or ‘guix lint’ should
notify ‘let-alist’ is already present in current Emacs.
>> ‘let-alist’
>> shouln't clutter much if it stays in Guix package
Hi Chris,
On Mon, 02 Apr 2018 00:12:42 +0200
Chris Marusich wrote:
> Thank you for writing a patch! It looks good to me. We will need to
> apply this to the core-updates branch, right? I think that changes to
> the ant-build-system will cause all packages that use it to be rebuilt.
I've push
Hi folks,
we did some changes in GNUnet where my part of the job reminded me again
of the path length Linux has as default.
I know there's at least (only?) 1 file in the Linux kernel which defines
the path length. Where else would we need to apply changes as a distro?
I think if there are really
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 06:59:23PM +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> we did some changes in GNUnet where my part of the job reminded me again
> of the path length Linux has as default.
>
> I know there's at least (only?) 1 file in the Linux kernel which defines
> the path length. Where else would we n
Leo Famulari transcribed 2.5K bytes:
> On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 06:59:23PM +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> > we did some changes in GNUnet where my part of the job reminded me again
> > of the path length Linux has as default.
> >
> > I know there's at least (only?) 1 file in the Linux kernel which d
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 07:27:46PM +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> I have inserted a build log of a failing test from
> GNUnet commit f13af7e7281064380def70d0b4392b4351211655
[...]
> TEST: Viewing all stats...FAIL: unexpected output:
> osystem othe
Leo Famulari transcribed 3.0K bytes:
> On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 07:27:46PM +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> > I have inserted a build log of a failing test from
> > GNUnet commit f13af7e7281064380def70d0b4392b4351211655
>
> [...]
>
> > TEST: Viewing all stats...FAIL: unexpected output:
> > osys
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 18:33:56 +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Am 06.05.2018 um 16:05 schrieb Mike Gerwitz:
>> In the case of their addon
>> system, they encourage installation of non-free addons, which is against
>> the Free Software Distribution Guidelines (FSDG), and is the same reason
>> that
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:17:20PM +, Nils Gillmann wrote:
> > That path is only 98 characters long. What limit do you think it is
> > exceeding?
It may be a shell restriction rather than a kernel restriction. I run
into the same thing with my binary path rewriting. My solution is to
truncate
17 matches
Mail list logo
