Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

k...@openmailbox.org (Kei Kebreau) writes: > kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master > in repository guix. > > commit 0e4591bb696a36bc83f75869dd2711987b17b722 > Author: ng0 > Date: Tue May 16 22:28:58 2017 + > > gnu: Add s. > > *

Re: Building gpgme with Qt support?

Leo Famulari writes: > On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 08:23:56PM +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote: >> Hi, >> >> since version 1.7 gpgme [1] includes both the C++ bindings (former >> package: gpgmepp) and the Qt-Framework API (former package qgpgme, not >> in guix). >> >> Our gpgme

Re: Any objections to removing linux-libre@4.1?

I forgot to mention: Leo Famulari writes: > I'd hate to "strand" existing users who might not notice that they are > not receiving updates to the 'linux-4.1' package they've specified in > their GuixSD configuration. I think they could not fail to notice, because if we

Re: `ruby-ansi` failure on 'staging'

Hi Marius! Marius Bakke skribis: > On the 'staging' branch (with ruby 2.4), the 'ruby-ansi' package fails > during the 'validate-runpath' phase: > > https://hydra.gnu.org/build/2078864 > > The issue is a dangling symlink to "lib/../.index". On 'master', this > symlink is

Re: Any objections to removing linux-libre@4.1?

Mark H Weaver skribis: > Does anyone here still need linux-libre@4.1 in Guix? If not, I'd like > to remove it. > > Upstream security updates for it seem to be quite infrequent (2.5 months > between the last two releases), and the recent update to 4.1.40 > neglected to include a

Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation

Hi Roel, Roel Janssen skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: [...] >>> FWIW, on our NFS-mounted /gnu, the 'guix environment' command takes at >>> least 20 seconds, but for any reasonably big environment it takes more >>> than one minute. The biggest bottleneck here is the disk

Re: Any objections to removing linux-libre@4.1?

Leo Famulari writes: > On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:11:39AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: >> Does anyone here still need linux-libre@4.1 in Guix? If not, I'd like >> to remove it. >> >> Upstream security updates for it seem to be quite infrequent (2.5 months >> between the last

`ruby-ansi` failure on 'staging'

On the 'staging' branch (with ruby 2.4), the 'ruby-ansi' package fails during the 'validate-runpath' phase: https://hydra.gnu.org/build/2078864 The issue is a dangling symlink to "lib/../.index". On 'master', this symlink is "../.index" which works; this is also the case in the build directory:

Re: Building gpgme with Qt support?

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 08:23:56PM +0200, Hartmut Goebel wrote: > Hi, > > since version 1.7 gpgme [1] includes both the C++ bindings (former > package: gpgmepp) and the Qt-Framework API (former package qgpgme, not > in guix). > > Our gpgme package is currently build *without* support for Qt: >

Building gpgme with Qt support?

Hi, since version 1.7 gpgme [1] includes both the C++ bindings (former package: gpgmepp) and the Qt-Framework API (former package qgpgme, not in guix). Our gpgme package is currently build *without* support for Qt: checking for GPGME_QT... checking for GPGME_QTTEST... ./configure: line 18672:

Re: Any objections to removing linux-libre@4.1?

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:11:39AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > Does anyone here still need linux-libre@4.1 in Guix? If not, I'd like > to remove it. > > Upstream security updates for it seem to be quite infrequent (2.5 months > between the last two releases), and the recent update to 4.1.40 >

Any objections to removing linux-libre@4.1?

Does anyone here still need linux-libre@4.1 in Guix? If not, I'd like to remove it. Upstream security updates for it seem to be quite infrequent (2.5 months between the last two releases), and the recent update to 4.1.40 neglected to include a fix for CVE-2017-6074, which does not inspire