Hello, Mark,
On Aug 15, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> I was talking about my hope to enable users, *on their own
> machines* and using *their own private build recipes*, to make a
> best-effort deblobbing of a non-standard kernel variant that they need
> to use for whatever reason.
A non-free
On Aug 15, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>>> I also consider it unwise for all of us, as a matter of habit or policy,
>>> to trust the integrity of the computer systems used by the Linux-libre
>>> project to perform the
On Aug 15, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> I only checked your claims regarding 5.4, and found that you're mistaken
> about them being updated in 5.4.44.
There was a change to scripts at 5.4.44, just not one you cared about,
because you didn't use the (discontinued) deblob-main script to prepare
a
On Aug 15, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2020, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>>
> It may be useful for users with newer hardware devices, which are
> not yet well supported by the latest stable release, to use an
> arbitrary commit from either Linus'
Hello, Mark,
Apologies for the delay in responding. It's been an "interesting" week.
I'm breaking up what turned out to be a very very long reply into
multiple posts, so as to address the various issues in separate posts,
that might very well turn into separate subthreads.
On Aug 15, 2020,
Raghav Gururajan writes:
> Hello Guix!
>
> As of today, my Outreachy Internship is over. I am very grateful to Guix
> for giving me this amazing opportunity.
>
> My work were done in wip-desktop branch. Some of the work are already
> being merged to master. Some more work in wip-desktop, require
Hello,
While trying to move some of the patching done to qtbase into a snippet,
with the goal of having at least the ./configure script runnable in a
guix environment without having to manually run patching phases:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
modified
On Friday, 21 August 2020 22:59:32 CEST Ekaitz Zarraga wrote:
> Thanks for bringing the question btw. I was worried about my workflow being
> correct and it happens to be!
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if there are more people who would like to
contribute, but then stumble on these minor
