Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Amirouche Boubekki writes: >> The problem is all users >> that are not GNU followers (and some GNU followers like me) who need a >> modern browser. > > Out of curiosity, please let us know what you need from the "modern > browser"? > > On my side, I need a debugger for doing web frontends. I nee

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Hi Clément, > Firefox 52 isn't supported anymore upstream[1] and we don't have a > package for Firefox 60. Currently the only alternative is Epiphany but > it's close to unusable (it crashes every 5 minutes, and sometimes > freezes my computer). I’m surprised to hear that you’ve had problems w

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Hi Ricardo, Thank you for your reply. Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Hi Clément, > >> Firefox 52 isn't supported anymore upstream[1] and we don't have a >> package for Firefox 60. Currently the only alternative is Epiphany but >> it's close to unusable (it crashes every 5 minutes, and sometimes >> f

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Mike Gerwitz transcribed 1.8K bytes: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:03:07 +0200, Clément Lassieur wrote: > > Firefox 52 isn't supported anymore upstream[1] and we don't have a > > package for Firefox 60. Currently the only alternative is Epiphany but > > it's close to unusable (it crashes every 5 mi

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Nils Gillmann transcribed 1.3K bytes: > Mike Gerwitz transcribed 1.8K bytes: > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:03:07 +0200, Clément Lassieur wrote: > > > Firefox 52 isn't supported anymore upstream[1] and we don't have a > > > package for Firefox 60. Currently the only alternative is Epiphany but > >

Re: Guix on aarch64

Hi Mark, Mark H Weaver skribis: > The 'guix publish' TTL is a secondary issue, because, as you say, the > NARs are only deleted if the corresponding store item has been GC'd. > The more important question is: what is the policy for deleting GC roots > on Berlin? As I wrote, there’s no policy ot

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Hi, Clément Lassieur skribis: > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose > Icecat or Firefox is unrelated. That means pulling a number of Rust dependencies, is that right? Thanks, Ludo’.

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Hello, Clément Lassieur skribis: > So the question is: can we push the Chromium package? I've read it's > almost ready[2]. It's probably far better than everything we have, > despite not being totally 'finished'. Maybe we can add what's left to > do as a TODO and fix the package later? As lo

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Ludovic Courtès transcribed 331 bytes: > Hi, > > Clément Lassieur skribis: > > > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the > > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose > > Icecat or Firefox is unrelated. > > That means pulling a number

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi, > > Clément Lassieur skribis: > >> The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the >> same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose >> Icecat or Firefox is unrelated. > > That means pulling a number of Rust dependencie

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Nils Gillmann writes: > Ludovic Courtès transcribed 331 bytes: >> Hi, >> >> Clément Lassieur skribis: >> >> > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the >> > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose >> > Icecat or Firefox is unrelated.

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

> >> ** TODO “GuixSD” renamed to “Guix System”? > > Guix System is not good because "system" is a word that is too generic. > > What about "Guix OS"? > > >> ** TODO “Cuirass” renamed to “Guix CI”? > > OK On the one hand, OS and CI are rather ubiquitous. On the other hand, I've personally always

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Hi Clément, >>> So the question is: can we push the Chromium package? I've read it's >>> almost ready[2]. >> >> The TODO list for convenience: >> >> --8<---cut here---start->8--- >> * There is still some data transmitted when starting the browser for the >>

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Hello, Pierre Neidhardt skribis: > Conversely, "Guix CI" is much less widespread, although I suppose many > developers are familiar with the term. I personally prefer unique, easy names > to abbreviations. > > - The name "Guix CI" tells developers what it is (continuous integration) > while >

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Nils Gillmann skribis: > Ludovic Courtès transcribed 331 bytes: >> Hi, >> >> Clément Lassieur skribis: >> >> > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the >> > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose >> > Icecat or Firefox is unrelated.

Re: Long term plan for GuixSD security: microkernels, ocap, RISC-V support

Hello Guix! l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > Specifically there are two things we can implement: > > 1. A ‘guix run’ command along the lines of > . > > 2. A mechanism that would allow, say, ‘guix package -i PKG

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello, > > Pierre Neidhardt skribis: > >> Conversely, "Guix CI" is much less widespread, although I suppose many >> developers are familiar with the term. I personally prefer unique, easy >> names >> to abbreviations. >> >> - The name "Guix CI" tells developers what

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Ludovic Courtès transcribed 990 bytes: > Nils Gillmann skribis: > > > Ludovic Courtès transcribed 331 bytes: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Clément Lassieur skribis: > >> > >> > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the > >> > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Guix, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: Ludovic Courtès writes: I think “Guix System” is OK. I think so too. Big +1. If you use 'guix system', you're using Guix System[0]. It doesn't get less confusing than that. Kind regards, T G-R [0]: The only question left is 'on what?'. Everything, of course

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

Ricardo Wurmus writes: >> So the question is: can we push the Chromium package? I've read it's >> almost ready[2]. > > The TODO list for convenience: > > --8<---cut here---start->8--- > * There is still some data transmitted when starting the browser for the >

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Tobias Geerinckx-Rice transcribed 340 bytes: > Guix, > > Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > I think “Guix System” is OK. > > > > I think so too. > > Big +1. > > If you use 'guix system', you're using Guix System[0]. > > It doesn't get less confusing than that. > > Kind r

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Hi, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello, > > Pierre Neidhardt skribis: > >> - If we get started with Guix CI and Guix OS, I'm afraid that soon enough we >> will end up with a bunch Guix FS, Guix IP, Guix CD... > > I think “Guix System” is OK. Most of the time we’ll just say “Guix”, as > is alrea

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 09:07:39 +, Nils Gillmann wrote: > Mike Gerwitz transcribed 1.8K bytes: >> But as was stated in another thread, once we _do_ have an updated IceCat >> source distribution, we need it packaged for Guix, and that is quite the >> undertaking. Has anyone pursued packaging m

Re: Firefox 52's end of life, packaging Chromium

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 07:14:37 +0200, Clément Lassieur wrote: > The problem is a technical problem. We would have with Icecat 60 the > same packaging difficulties we have with Firefox 60. Whether we choose > Icecat or Firefox is unrelated. Right, which is why I was curious if there were recent

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Am 30.08.2018 um 14:04 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > “Guix Continuous” For me this sounds like a fail-save system which will continue running, and running, and running. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goe...@crazy-compilers.com | | www.crazy-compilers.com | co

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Ludovic Courtès writes: > I think “Guix System” is OK. Most of the time we’ll just say “Guix”, as > is already the case, and when we need to disambiguate (for instance when > addressing bugs), we’ll ask “Are you using Guix System?” or “Are you > using the Guix distro?”, and everything will be fin

Re: FOSDEM 2019

Just to clarify, we will organize a two day Guix conference before FOSDEM. That is pretty much in the box. We have room at ICAB, the place we were last year. http://icab.be/ In addition to the Guix conference there is the possibility to have a dev-room at FOSDEM, but we need to apply for it. I

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >> Hello, >> >> I think “Guix System” is OK. > > I think so too. I recommend against renaming GuixSD >> "Guix System". Here is Why: 1) A noob would expect "guix system" to refer to the whole Guix enchilada. If we use it to refer to GuixSD, a

Re: FOSDEM 2019

On 2018-08-30 20:20, Pjotr Prins wrote: Just to clarify, we will organize a two day Guix conference before FOSDEM. That is pretty much in the box. We have room at ICAB, the place we were last year. http://icab.be/ About the specifically guix event, maybe it's a good time to organize an insta

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Hi Chris, > I'm not advocating that we change anything; I'm only advocating that we > should make our stability promise (if any) clear by documenting it. If > you want to know my thoughts about what sort of stability promise we > should provide, I'd be happy to talk about that also, but here I'

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

Pierre Neidhardt writes: > - The name "Guix CI" tells developers what it is (continuous integration) > while > "Cuirass" does not. This is mostly true, however, for almost all > applications > (mpv, firefox, chromium, emacs, ). Just an anecdote: I didn't know what Cuirass was until I read

Re: Haskel LTS 12.8.

Hi Again, Timothy Sample writes: > Hello, > > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > >> Hi Tim, >> >>> To avoid duplicating work, I wanted to let you know that I am working on >>> updating the Haskell packages to their LTS 12.8 versions. This will go >>> nicely with the new GHC 8.4.3. >> >> Excellent! I ha

Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

George Clemmer ezt írta (időpont: 2018. aug. 30., Cs, 21:14): > > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > > > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> I think “Guix System” is OK. > > > > I think so too. > > I recommend against renaming GuixSD >> "Guix System". Here is Why: > > 1) A noob would expect

Re: Guix on aarch64

Hi Joshua, >> I agree. We need volunteers to pick a particular configuration (my >> suggestion is to start with an Overdrive 3000 rack server[1]) and find a >> place to host these servers. We have not been successful in delegating >> this to other people and unfortunately the maintainers canno

Re: FOSDEM 2019

On 2018-08-30 21:38, Amirouche Boubekki wrote: Open Space Technology (OST) is a method for organizing and running a meeting or multi-day conference, where participants have been invited in order to focus on a specific, important task or purpose. OST is a participant-driven process whose agenda