> A better test infrastructure in Guix would probably be good, but is not
> ready yet. Would it make sense, however, to split out those inputs only
> needed for testing?
>
> Such a step would probably make bootstrapping new architectures a lot
> easier. It would also reduce the dependency graph in
Hi,
Apoorv writes:
> I can add rust:cargo but the package definition in the guix.scm is already
> using `cargo-build-system` shouldn't it include rust and cargo etc
> automatically?
It should, but if it doesn't you may want to review how rust:cargo input
gets added to the cargo-build-system;
I enjoyed reading the retrospective. It sounds like people had fun. I'm sure
the ones who asked questions appreciated the opportunity to ask them in person
and connect with others in the community. Thanks for putting it together!
Am Dienstag, dem 02.01.2024 um 10:14 +0200 schrieb Saku Laesvuori:
> > A better test infrastructure in Guix would probably be good, but is
> > not ready yet. Would it make sense, however, to split out those
> > inputs only needed for testing?
> >
> > Such a step would probably make bootstrapping n
