Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

Hi Ricardo, About the precedence, i.e., extension that overrides default command, see patch#45910. On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 23:42, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > zimoun writes: > We can change this, but we’d need to agree on an as yet unused directory > as the root

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

zimoun writes: >> I have added a search path specification to the “guix” package itself, >> so that it will set GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH to >> $profile/share/guix/extensions automatically. The idea is to update the >> format of the “channels.scm” file to allow for the installation of extra >>

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

Re, On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 23:42, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > zimoun writes: > > >> So if the file is at /tmp/foo/guix/extensions/bar.scm then > >> $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH should be /tmp/foo/guix/extensions. > > > > Well, I will propose to have the thing as you said before. Because > > fixing (guix

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

zimoun writes: >> So if the file is at /tmp/foo/guix/extensions/bar.scm then >> $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH should be /tmp/foo/guix/extensions. > > Well, I will propose to have the thing as you said before. Because > fixing (guix extensions bar) and the path $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH/foo > seems

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

Hi, On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 23:25, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Oh, my bad: $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH must actually include the > “/guix/extensions” sub-directory. Thanks. It works! \o/ Awesome :-) > So if the file is at /tmp/foo/guix/extensions/bar.scm then > $GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH should be

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

zimoun writes: >>> --8<---cut here---start->8--- >>> $ cat /tmp/foo/bar.scm >>> (define-module (guix extensions bar) >>> #:use-module (guix scripts)) >> >> This right here is the problem. The module name and the file name do >> not match. The file must

[Emacs-Guix] make: Error 255

Hi, Giving a look at the “lagging” build utility with Emacs-Guix, I have checked out and run ’make’. But I get a couple of errors: --8<---cut here---start->8--- make[1]: [Makefile:1283: elisp/guix-build-config.elc] Error 255 (ignored) make[1]: [Makefile:1283:

Re: New “ungrafting” branch

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:57:50AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > Following discussions on IRC, I’ve created a new ‘ungrafting’ branch > > that does nothing but ungraft things. > > > > The rationale is that grafts incur additional overhead when installing > > things

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

Hi, On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 21:45, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > zimoun writes: > >> In the mood for documenting the recent GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH, I am >> missing something because I hit an error. > > It’s not your fault. It’s hard to do this without documentation. It’s so cool that I would like to

Re: GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

zimoun writes: > In the mood for documenting the recent GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH, I am > missing something because I hit an error. It’s not your fault. It’s hard to do this without documentation. > --8<---cut here---start->8--- > $ cat /tmp/foo/bar.scm >

GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH error?

Hi, In the mood for documenting the recent GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH, I am missing something because I hit an error. Before diving, maybe my daily coffee dose is not enough… --8<---cut here---start->8--- $ cat /tmp/foo/bar.scm (define-module (guix extensions bar)

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability armhf-linux]

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 09:27:36AM +0100, Vincent Legoll wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:07 AM Leo Famulari wrote: > > Specifically about armhf, if anybody wants to use it with Guix, I hope > > they will speak up. > > I am interested, I have tried, and failed to get anything (apart from guix

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability]

Mathieu Othacehe writes: > Now, how to move on? > > First, I still need to connect the four overdrives machine to the new > Cuirass remote building mechanism, and I would need some help for that > (asked on guix-sysadmins). But, I'm not sure it will much improve the > situation. > > Longer

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability armhf-linux]

Hello, On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:54 AM Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > It seems that Caliph Nomble succeeded to build a Pinebook Pro image and > booted it, without graphics, after a few fixes: > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/45584. > > You may want to try again :). DONE, it's a bit better, this time

Multiple values → SRFI-71

Hello Guix! Starting from commit 4f621a2b003e85d480999e4d0630e9dc3de85bc3, we require Guile >= 2.2.6. Since (srfi srfi-71) was added in Guile 2.2.4, I suggest using it instead of the more clunky (srfi srfi-11) ‘let-values’. We can gradually migrate code. Note that (guix build utils), (guix

Re: guix build: error: without-test=foo: unrecognized option

Hi Ludo, On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 23:30, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > We should display suggestions based on Levenshtein distance. Done in patch#45893. Feedback welcome because it is a quick draft for my Friday's procrastination. ;-) Cheers, simon

Re: guix build: error: without-test=foo: unrecognized option

Hi Chris, On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 23:18, Christopher Baines wrote: > > What do I miss? > > An s. Ahah! The bug is always between the keyboard and the chair. ;-) Cheers, simon

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability armhf-linux]

Hello Vincent, > I even attempted building the pinebook pro image without success. It seems that Caliph Nomble succeeded to build a Pinebook Pro image and booted it, without graphics, after a few fixes: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/45584. You may want to try again :). >> There is almost no

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability armhf-linux]

Hey Ludo, > You seem to imply that the issue is the number of architectures, rather > than the small number of ARMv7 build machines (now that we disabled > 32-bit builds on AArch64). Do I get it right? Yes my point is that building three specifications on three architectures, including an

Re: Staging branch [substitute availability armhf-linux]

Hello, On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:07 AM Leo Famulari wrote: > Specifically about armhf, if anybody wants to use it with Guix, I hope > they will speak up. I am interested, I have tried, and failed to get anything (apart from guix on foreign armbian). But I am more interested in guixsd though.