Re: [PATCH 0/1] qt-build-system: Wrap with build variables to allow %outputs in arguments

Hi Rutherther, On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 11:17 PM, Rutherther wrote: > It is impossible to refer to %outputs in arguments like #:configure-flags > (ie. `(assoc-ref %outputs "out")` leads to unbound-variable %outputs). You should be able to use gexps, e.g. #$output (see

Re: Bootstrapping Zig with no binary blobs: status update and call for packages.

On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:39:10 +0800, Hilton Chain wrote: > > Other new arguments, #:skip-build? and #:zig-inputs, like the ones in > cargo-build-system, are available. Note that packages and sources in > #:zig-inputs must have their output names starting with "zig-". Amend: #:zig-inputs will be re

Re: ‘cargo-build-system’ makes everything slow

On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 05:44:16PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > I was profiling the ‘dependents’ procedure use by the new ‘guix build > --dependents’ option in (guix scripts build). Like ‘guix refresh -l’, > it lowers all the packages to a bag, constructs the graph, and traverses > all

Re: ‘cargo-build-system’ makes everything slow

On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 08:24:29PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Hi, > > Perhaps this would be a good time to revive the antioxidant-build-system > by Maxime Devos. I see on https://issues.guix.gnu.org/64904 that > Nicolas Graves had been working on bringing it back to live, but there > are no p

Re: Regarding the vertical alignment in the record definitions

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 01:34:29AM +0100, Tomas Volf wrote: > > Hello Guix, > > I would like to bring up for debate the convention the project has of > vertically aligning the record definitions. While I agree it lead to > visually pleasing code, I also leads to significantly bloated diffs. > >

Re: [PATCH 0/1] qt-build-system: Wrap with build variables to allow %outputs in arguments

Hi John, thanks. > You should be able to use gexps, e.g. #$output (see > > for more details). That is actually the preferred way now, though > there are still instances of assoc-ref. > I believe the commit in question is >

Re: Regarding the vertical alignment in the record definitions

Hi Tomas, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> writes: > Hello Guix, > > I would like to bring up for debate the convention the project has of > vertically aligning the record definitions. I don't think that's a project convention. It's more like it's a convention of some individual in the projects :-).

Re: Bootstrapping Zig with no binary blobs: status update and call for packages.

On Tue, 03 Dec 2024 23:37:01 +0800, Hilton Chain wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Dec 2024 19:30:38 +0800, > Ashvith Shetty wrote: > > > > So far, I've packaged waylock. Since I am on Xorg for the time-being, I > > would really appreciate it if anyone using Wayland would test this > >

Re: [Deprecation RFC] node@10 (a.k.a. node-bootstrap)

Hi Jelle, On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 3:03 AM Jelle Licht wrote: > > I've just sent out the v2 series to bump Node.js and friends: > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74187 Just wanted to say THANK YOU for your work on this. We use Node as the production Wasm runtime for testing Hoot and when I looked into

[PATCH 0/1] qt-build-system: Wrap with build variables to allow %outputs in arguments

It is impossible to refer to %outputs in arguments like #:configure-flags (ie. `(assoc-ref %outputs "out")` leads to unbound-variable %outputs). I think the issue is in qt using different system than build systems such as cmake or gnu. Since I am unsure about the reason for qt not having the same s

[Deprecation RFC] node@10 (a.k.a. node-bootstrap)

Hi guix, I've just sent out the v2 series to bump Node.js and friends: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74187 In this proposed series of patches, the version of Node.js (node@10.24.1) we use to bootstrap node-llhttp-bootstrap becomes a hidden package. As per my reading of the policy w.r.t. 'removing'

Re: Automatically testing package updates

On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 08:14:04PM +0100, Simon Tournier wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 02 Dec 2024 at 14:44, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > > This manifest is just an example. We could come up with manifests > > targeting package collections like CRAN packages, astronomy packages, > > and so on. > > Le