Diffoscope uses *lots* of optional tools for which it would be
impractical to embed all the tool references in the guix
packaging... instead, for the most part, diffoscope relies on PATH to
find helper utilities to decode various file formats into something more
human readable...
But libxmlb
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 12:48:16 -0400 Pier-Hugues Pellerin
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is that a new behaviour? I’ve recently updated go to package to 1.17.8.
Hi Pier-Hugues,
Did go libraries in a `guix shell` ever work for you?
all best,
jgart
Hello,
Is that a new behaviour? I’ve recently updated go to package to 1.17.8.
Sent from my portable monolith.
Ph
> On Apr 16, 2022, at 12:09 PM, jgart wrote:
>
> Hi Guixers,
>
> go libraries do not work in a guix shell.
>
> Some user experience reports:
>
> 2022-04-13 23:40:32Go
Hi Guixers,
go libraries do not work in a guix shell.
Some user experience reports:
2022-04-13 23:40:32Go works in guix shell, but you have to add
other stuff like glibc and I think binutils
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice writes:
> We don't have easy access to lower-level logs. Do you? You look like you
> might self-host.
>
> Armed with a log snippet from you with a clear 250 'accepted' I'd feel less
> bothersome asking the gnu.org folks to investigate.
You know, I hadn’t even
Hi Brian,
On 16 April 2022 11:36:52 UTC, Brian Cully wrote:
>
> I sent an email to 54...@debbugs.gnu.org to update it with more
>specific information almost two days ago and I haven’t seen any changes
>in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/54919 . I also never got a bounce or
>other return
I sent an email to 54...@debbugs.gnu.org to update it with more
specific information almost two days ago and I haven’t seen any changes
in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/54919 . I also never got a bounce or
other return communication saying what has happened; it’s as if my email
were
