Then, if I understood correctly, IMO I would say Guile should not
really care about Guix's bundling/unbundling. That is, adding (ice-9
base64) (or however we want to call it... maybe (encoding base64)
following Golang and Guile's (web ) module) should be totally
independent of Guix. So, if
Hi,
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 at 22:22, Csepp wrote:
> Mumi and Debbugs have different search interfaces and seem to use
> different ordering.
Hum, I am confused because from my understanding, there is one Debbugs
instance – which is quickly said some Perl scripts managing mailing
lists and thus impl
Hi Josselin,
Thank you for the clear explanations.
On mer., 06 juil. 2022 at 22:01, Josselin Poiret wrote:
[...]
> What I personally think, is that we should rationalize the way we
> interact with Guix source: a running Guix should always be able to hold
> a reference to its source. The guix
Hi Bengt,
On mar., 26 juil. 2022 at 03:09, Bengt Richter wrote:
> I naively don't buy the rationale against a non-root guix daemon :)
For sure, we can imagine many other designs than the current implemented
one. However, at one point or the other, “something with privileges” is
required, no?
I recently found dosdefender-ld31, a public domain DOS game, designed
to run in dosbox. To build you only need gnu make and a version of gcc
that targets i386-gnu or i386-gnu-linux.
Am Donnerstag, dem 18.08.2022 um 17:33 +0200 schrieb Tobias Platen:
> I recently found dosdefender-ld31, a public domain DOS game, designed
> to run in dosbox. To build you only need gnu make and a version of
> gcc that targets i386-gnu or i386-gnu-linux.
In that case building a Guix package ought
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 12:56 AM Maxime Devos
wrote:
> Then, if I understood correctly, IMO I would say Guile should not really
> care about Guix's bundling/unbundling. That is, adding (ice-9 base64) (or
> however we want to call it... maybe (encoding base64) following Golang and
> Guile's (web .
