On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 12:08:24 -0300
EuAndreh wrote:
> Hello Guix!
>
> I know that making all packages reproducible is a current ongoing
> effort, and I've seen a few bug reports in debbugs about specific
> unreproducible packages.
>
> Is there a way to know about all unreproducible packages? Som
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 14:44:19 -0400
Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:36:18PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
> > Okay, are you able to send a patch to disable the test and report
> > this issue upstream?
>
> Did this bug ever get reported upstream?
At least there is a 1.14.2 out:
h
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:36:18PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
> Okay, are you able to send a patch to disable the test and report this
> issue upstream?
Did this bug ever get reported upstream?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Chris Marusich writes:
> I think you're right: the fact that a malicious actor can induce
> requests to your localhost endpoint is cause for concern, even if the
> exact methods of exploitation are not obvious.
>
> I looked into this. I learned that Firefox (and our IceCat) supports a
> SOCKS pro
Hello Guix!
I know that making all packages reproducible is a current ongoing
effort, and I've seen a few bug reports in debbugs about specific
unreproducible packages.
Is there a way to know about all unreproducible packages? Something
similar to how Debian reports[0] it's packages.
[0]: https:
Don't know if it's related, but since yesterday's pull I get errors when trying
to update some packages:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
> (process-package-actions "/var/guix/profiles/per-user/ambrevar/guix-profile"
> #:install '() #:upgrade '(("gnupg@2.2.8" "out
Hi there!
Trying to get a Brother HL-2130 running on my GuixSD here.
I had a glimpse at
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2017-09/msg00099.html
According to
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/CUPS/Printer-specific_problems#Brother
it should work with
foo
