Here is the lint log, it did not run to completion, it has an error at the end.
2018-01-14 18:43 GMT+01:00 Gábor Boskovits <boskov...@gmail.com>: > Ok, I started a guix lint on 0.14.0.1183-1b321. > Will attach log here asap. > > > 2018-01-14 17:53 GMT+01:00 Danny Milosavljevic <dan...@scratchpost.org>: > >> On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 17:43:27 +0100 >> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <m...@tobias.gr> wrote: >> >> > Gábor Boskovits wrote on 14/01/18 at 17:13: >> > > Maybe we could use guix to check for these, and some >> > > other things could also be spotted. >> > > WDYT? >> > >> > Agreed, I think. >> >> Yeah, +1 >> >> > We should be able to improve the quality of these guesses: the >> > repository URI is about as likely to be foo://bar/<package>... as a >> > regular tarball URI. >> > >> > Or we make a file-name mandatory for certain methods. >> >> I agree that some heuristics to figure out the file-name from >> (svn-reference-url ref) would be nice. >> >> It's not that important that the store filenames are meaningful to >> humans, it's just nice-to-have. So I'd say heuristic it and be done with >> it. >> >> On second thought, maybe even default file-name to the Guix package name >> (if possible at this point in Guix). The hash value will make it unique >> regardless (for example if there are multiple svn-download blocks in the >> same package) >> > >
lint-log
Description: Binary data
