On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 9:32 PM Chris Marusich wrote:
>
> Aiko, can you confirm that after running "guix pull" the issue is
> resolved on your end, too?
>
I can confirm that this test passes here. However guix system
reconfigure is still failing for me on aarch64 due to the test
On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 2:58 AM Chris Marusich wrote:
>
>
> > It would be great to get this upstreamed soon so I can start guix
> > pulling master. I think the guix commit and revision in
> > package-management.scm will also need to be bumped after applying this
> > fix.
>
> It shouldn't be
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 9:53 PM Chris Marusich wrote:
>
> > Commit 9309b48 seems to be a week old and I can't seem to apply this
> > patch on top of the latest commit on master e6fe4e5819.
>
> How did you apply the patch?
>
Without thinking apparently (i.e. using git apply). It applies just
fine,
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 7:15 PM Chris Marusich wrote:
>
> Aiko's patch would indeed fix the failing test. Thank you, Aiko, for
> taking the initiative to help investigate and solve the issue! However,
> even though that patch would fix the test, anyone who is using
> set-xorg-configuration on a
On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 9:51 PM Leo Famulari wrote:
>
> Thanks, and I've attached a graph of the same operating system
> declaration from the same revision of Guix but for x86_64, along with
> rendered images of both graphs.
>
> The graphs clearly show that xorg-server is provided in two places on
Attached is the output of guix system shepherd-graph
gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl on commit 2a49ddb513
graph.dot
Description: MS-Word document
> To avoid this unexpected sensitivity on the source origin
> method, I
> suggest that we explicitly exclude 'source' from consideration
> within
> the 'set-paths' phase. What do you think?
I agree. We should do that in the next ‘core-updates’.
I recently ran into this bug myself and was
