Simon Tournier writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 09:33, Csepp wrote:
>
>> That is not a package problem but a Guix interface problem. I have been
>> saying for a while that there needs to be an option to disable all
>> non-trivial local builds by default when you know your machine
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 09:33, Csepp wrote:
> That is not a package problem but a Guix interface problem. I have been
> saying for a while that there needs to be an option to disable all
> non-trivial local builds by default when you know your machine can't
> handle them.
IMHO, your
(changing the subject back to the intended one. I think the fact that
someone replies to an automated acknowledgement email like once a week
says indicates that the emails are not communicating clearly what their
purpose is. anyways, on to the actual issue at hand.)
Simon Tournier writes:
>
Hi Maxime,
Maxime Devos writes:
[...]
> (I usually don't respond to e-mails I agree with except for
> superficialities, but I was wondering if such non-replies are actually
> interpreted as such, or as disagreements, or neither.)
I'd say it's safer to assume neither, though perhaps with a
> [Two mails previously]
> Also the CI UI could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure I've
> mentioned this before, but there is no easy way to find out which
> inputs I need to fix to make a dependency failure disappear.
[...]
That is precisely what the linear search algorithm is. I should
On 2023-08-27 02:13, 宋文武 wrote:
> Maybe we can automatically report the failures as bugs, say every 7
> days, and remove a package if it still fail to build in 90 days?
Hi, maybe build failures should be limited to certain platforms that can
cause this treatment, such as (32-bit) x86, x86-64 and
Bruno Victal writes:
> On 2023-08-27 02:13, 宋文武 wrote:
>> Maybe we can automatically report the failures as bugs, say every 7
>> days, and remove a package if it still fail to build in 90 days?
maybe precedeed by an automated email notification (to guix-bugs) so
that interested people have the
On 2023-08-27 02:13, 宋文武 wrote:
> Maybe we can automatically report the failures as bugs, say every 7
> days, and remove a package if it still fail to build in 90 days?
I'm not so sure about removing packages, personally if I'm in need of
a package that happens to be broken I find it easier to
Hi again,
宋文武 writes:
> Maxime Devos writes:
>
>> For example, naev used to work just fine, yet apparently it doesn't
>> anymore: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65390.
>>
>> Given that Guix has ci.guix.gnu.org, I would expect such new problems
>> to be detected and resolved early, and it was
Hello,
宋文武 writes:
> Maxime Devos writes:
>
>> For example, naev used to work just fine, yet apparently it doesn't
>> anymore: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65390.
>>
>> Given that Guix has ci.guix.gnu.org, I would expect such new problems
>> to be detected and resolved early, and it was
Maxime Devos writes:
> For example, naev used to work just fine, yet apparently it doesn't
> anymore: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65390.
>
> Given that Guix has ci.guix.gnu.org, I would expect such new problems
> to be detected and resolved early, and it was detected by
> ci.guix.gnu.org, yet
Maxime Devos writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> Op 23-08-2023 om 01:45 schreef Csepp:
>> I tried signing up to the CI mailing list and it immediately became
>> overwhelming.
>
> If the CI list was split in ‘broken’ and ‘fixed’, such that you have
> the option to only subscribe to
Maxime Devos writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
>
> Op 23-08-2023 om 01:45 schreef Csepp:
>> Also the CI UI could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure I've
>> mentioned this before, but there is no easy way to find out which inputs
>> I need to fix to make a dependency failure
Simon Tournier writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 at 01:45, Csepp wrote:
>
>> One possible improvement I have been thinking about is making it easy
>> for users to filter CI output to the packages in their profile closure,
>> so for example they would get advance notice of any broken
Op 23-08-2023 om 01:45 schreef Csepp:
I tried signing up to the CI mailing list and it immediately became
overwhelming.
If the CI list was split in ‘broken’ and ‘fixed’, such that you have the
option to only subscribe to ‘broken’, would that help? A large fraction
of messages is for fixed
Op 23-08-2023 om 01:45 schreef Csepp:
Also the CI UI could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure I've
mentioned this before, but there is no easy way to find out which inputs
I need to fix to make a dependency failure disappear. I think everyone
has better things to do than perform a linear
Hi,
On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 at 01:45, Csepp wrote:
> One possible improvement I have been thinking about is making it easy
> for users to filter CI output to the packages in their profile closure,
> so for example they would get advance notice of any broken packages
> *before* attempting to install
Maxime Devos writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> For example, naev used to work just fine, yet apparently it doesn't
> anymore: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65390.
>
> Given that Guix has ci.guix.gnu.org, I would expect such new problems
> to be detected and resolved early, and it was
For example, naev used to work just fine, yet apparently it doesn't
anymore: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65390.
Given that Guix has ci.guix.gnu.org, I would expect such new problems to
be detected and resolved early, and it was detected by ci.guix.gnu.org,
yet going by issues.guix.gnu.org it
19 matches
Mail list logo
