On 2019-01-26 21:13, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
swedebugia writes:
[...]
Actually what is even nicer is emacs-debbugs and its ability to apply
patches from emails. The UI is somewhat lacking and I think we should
fork it so that it defaults to guix bugs and packages.
There's no need to fork ema
swedebugia writes:
> Also we should mention that the error which appears after applying
> patches from emails can be ignored - the patches apply succesfully
> anyways.
What error are you referring to?
--
Ricardo
Hello,
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:57:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> There’s a ledger for the Guix Europe non-profit¹, which is a separate
> entity, but most of the transactions on the funds held at the FSF have
> been made via Guix Europe.
And the decisions of the Solidary Administrative Co
Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
Ludovic Courtès writes:
There’s a ledger for the Guix Europe non-profit¹, which is a
separate
entity, but most of the transactions on the funds held at the
FSF have
been made via Guix Europe. Another use of the FSF fund has
been the
Outreachy internship (that predates
Hi Guix,
for the past few days I’ve been trying to reduce the module closure of
“coreutils” by inspecting the output of
guix graph -t module coreutils
This has shown a number of modules that are much too large and pull in
almost all other modules.
I’d like to propose a reduction of the modu
Hi Guix,
I tried to move most of the packages in gnu/packages/guile.scm to a new
module gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm.
The only problem with this is that package-for-guile2.0 cannot be used
in guile-xyz.scm. I cannot compile the module when there’s a reference
to package-for-guile2.0, even when the
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 23:22:47 +0100
Pierre Neidhardt wrote:
> "The Perfect Setup" sounds a bit exclusive in my opinion, there is a
> whole world of possibilities out there... :)
That's just what the manual writes about it :-)
> That said, if it's only about Emacs+Geiser+Magit, I'd be happy to
>
Hello Guix,
‘staging’ is definitely usable on x86_64 now. On i686, Java is pretty
much missing though:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
Issued 1 semantic warning compiling
"src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/rmic/XNewRmic.java":
34. public static fi
Answering my own question after digging through the guix source, maybe someone
can correct me if I’ve gotten things wrong!
> On Jan 25, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Ivan Petkov wrote:
>
> However, it appears that guix still insists on building the entire package
> even
> if we only depend on the "src" out
make check log is as follows,
yoshi@WaraToNora ~/guix [env]$ make check
make check-recursive
make[1]: ǣ '/home/yoshi/guix' ke�~Y
Making check in po/guix
make[2]: ǣ '/home/yoshi/guix/po/guix' ke�~Y
make[2]: ǣ '/home/yoshi/guix/po/guix' K��~Y
Making check in po/packages
make[2]: ǣ '
Andreas Enge skrev: (27 januari 2019 16:43:34 CET)
>Hello,
>
>On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:57:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> There’s a ledger for the Guix Europe non-profit¹, which is a separate
>> entity, but most of the transactions on the funds held at the FSF
>have
>> been made via Guix E
Hi,
What commit is this from? I just ran "make check" on
86228e569baaf1de0bfbb692fb2821df23f98b4a and although I do get one test
failure, it looks very different from what you have shared.
Some more questions to help troubleshoot:
- Does it still fail when you build from a fresh checkout?
- Do
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 10:45:58PM -0800, Chris Marusich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What commit is this from? I just ran "make check" on
> 86228e569baaf1de0bfbb692fb2821df23f98b4a and although I do get one test
> failure, it looks very different from what you have shared.
>
> Some more questions to help t
13 matches
Mail list logo
