Re: Heads-up: transition to Guile 2.2

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 06:28:01PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Most troublesome is that some packages set GUILE_LOAD_PATH and > GUILE_LOAD_COMPILED_PATH and mixing guile-2.0 and guile-2.2 packages > that do so is still troublesome. It would be nice (TM) if we could > find a way not to rely o

GNU Hurd at Guix days

We had a very interesting discussion about the Hurd. I ran the Hurd before, but now I am going down the rabbit hole of reading device drivers and such. It is very interesting. I envisage a 'Cloud Hurd' that have minimal hardware demands and a Guix system definition. Running a Guile webserver, fo

[PATCH] gnu: Add ruby-gherkin3

* gnu/packages/ruby.scm (ruby-gherkin3): New variable. --- gnu/packages/ruby.scm | 25 + 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/ruby.scm b/gnu/packages/ruby.scm index ee0acc8..4756cd4 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/ruby.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/ruby.scm @@ -11

Re: Guix under GNU???s umbrella for GSoC?

How good is user space support for Guix? I haven't gotten down to trying yet, but that is on my list. If that works I could think of many applications (Python/Ruby modules, vim modules, etc.). Or are we forced to have a server running? Recompilation is not a problem. Pj. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at