bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-05 Thread pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Pushed as 74517806f80dab17474a3c5f0b91d437e4d4e052. I picked up some of your rewording and have changed the wording slightly to mention Automake, to make it more likely to be picked up by search engines when given the error. Thank you for being insistent. Regards, Florian

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-05 Thread Rostislav Svoboda
Hello Florian, > Would that be OK? Yeah, that's it. Sure, it's not much but it is at least "something" we can refer to and later improve upon. Here is a different wording of your text (,aided by AI. Pick the one of your liking and commit it please): Should @command{make} fail with a new error

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-04 Thread pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Hello Rostislav. I do not know how to address the issue properly or where to document it. The Writing Documentation section is the wrong place, because everyone has to bootstrap again, not only the one who is writing documentation; if we put a notice somewhere, then it would be something like:

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-04 Thread Rostislav Svoboda
> So there is no solution, is there? In short, you provided a detailed explanation why there's no automatic solution for failing `make doc/guix.texi` when a new language is added to the documentation. So far so good. I appreciate that. However, this is exactly the kind of situation that is

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-03 Thread pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
My apologies for not giving a good response. Yes, the issue you mention is indeed different from a record ABI mismatch, in that the error message for an ABI message says “recompilation needed” and is documented in the manual, unlike the problematic error message that you reported. Adding a note

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-03 Thread Rostislav Svoboda
Hi Florian, > This advice [...] I don’t think [...] it is worth the notification [...] It ate me away ~1 work-hour, from the "It doesn't compile, what the hell!?!" moment, all the way through the "What am I doing wrong?... Nothing!" phases, until I found the culprit. And then the search for a

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-03 Thread pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Hello Rostislav, This advice would not be read by most affected Guix developers. The problem is that every guix developer must rerun ./bootstrap and ./configure on pulling certain changes like ABI breaks (when a new record is added) and new cookbook versions. Every Guix developer making a

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-02 Thread Rostislav Svoboda
> Rerun ./bootstrap and configure, then make Yeap that helped. Thank you Efraim. BTW there's a corresponding comment in the doc/local.mk which could be improved: modified doc/local.mk @@ -21,7 +21,8 @@ # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with GNU

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-02 Thread Efraim Flashner
Rerun ./bootstrap and configure, then make On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 03:59:36PM +0200, Rostislav Svoboda wrote: > $ guix shell --development guix direnv gnupg --pure -- > bost@ecke ~/dev/guix [env]$ make doc/guix.texi > cd . && /bin/sh /home/bost/dev/guix/build-aux/missing automake-1.16 > --gnu

bug#70140: Missing ./doc/guix-cookbook.pt_BR.texi

2024-04-02 Thread Rostislav Svoboda
$ guix shell --development guix direnv gnupg --pure -- bost@ecke ~/dev/guix [env]$ make doc/guix.texi cd . && /bin/sh /home/bost/dev/guix/build-aux/missing automake-1.16 --gnu Makefile Makefile.am:922: warning: AM_GNU_GETTEXT used but 'po' not in SUBDIRS automake-1.16: error: cannot open <