Hi,
On Sun, 2022-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am Sat, Jun 04, 2022 at 02:07:15PM +0200 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> > As a first step I’d suggest collecting teams, setting up the email
> > aliases, and updating the website to show the existing teams.
> > Here’s
> > a
June 8, 2022 at 9:38 PM, "Ludovic Courtès" mailto:l...@gnu.org?to=%22Ludovic%20Court%C3%A8s%22%20%3Cludo%40gnu.org%3E >
wrote:
> Guix is *potentially* even more up-to-date than NixOS thanks to
> ‘--with-latest’ and ‘--with-branch’! \o/
I do use --with-latest for testing package upgrades. But it
June 7, 2022 at 6:47 PM, "Nicolas Goaziou" mailto:m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr?to=%22Nicolas%20Goaziou%22%20%3Cmail%40nicolasgoaziou.fr%3E
> wrote:
> Repology hasn't been able to caught Guix package updates for a while
> now. As a consequence, many packages are marked as outdated in Repology
> even
Hi,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
[…]
> Seriously though, we could take better advantage of the tooling that we
> have: ‘guix refresh’, ‘guix graph’, and the corresponding APIs. With
> that, we can write code that automatically tries out package updates and
> prepares patches, for instance. We
Hello,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
>
>> On 2022-06-04, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>>> As a first step I’d suggest collecting teams, setting up the email
>>> aliases, and updating the website to show the existing teams. Here’s
>>> a draft of three teams:
>>
>> I'm almost
Hi!
kias...@disroot.org skribis:
> I know that rolling release distros don't have to have the latest packages
> but this is not the best representation of Guix, especially when our friend
> NixOS claims they have the largest and most updated package collection
>
Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
> On 2022-06-04, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> As a first step I’d suggest collecting teams, setting up the email
>> aliases, and updating the website to show the existing teams. Here’s
>> a draft of three teams:
>
> I'm almost afraid to volunteer... but maybe architecture
Hey Efraim,
Efraim Flashner skribis:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 11:17:47PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ludovic Courtès skribis:
>>
>> ‘guix weather -s i686-linux’ says 89% (which is underestimated, because
>> it wrongfully checks for all the packages, including unsupported
>>
Efraim Flashner skribis:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 05:11:48PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
>> The manual mentions the two web interfaces in addition to Emacs:
>>
>> https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Debbugs-User-Interfaces.html
>>
>> Do you or would you use them to keep
Hi Tom,
Tom Fitzhenry skribis:
> Per https://ci.guix.gnu.org/eval/364633?status=pending , there are ~5k
> scheduled jobs, all aarch64-linux.
>
> Per https://ci.guix.gnu.org/workers, all workers report being idle.
>
> Thus, it looks like the aarch64 builders have stalled.
It looks like
On 2022-06-08, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 07:20:25AM +0200, Julien Lepiller wrote:
>> On June 7, 2022 5:24:22 AM GMT+02:00, Felix Lechner
>> wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 6:50 PM Vagrant Cascadian
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So, Debian's maradns package just removes this
On 2022-06-09, Arun Isaac wrote:
> Hi Vagrant,
>
>> But there's one nervous-making issue this revealed; maradns embeds a
>> random number at build time ... allegedly for systems that don't have
>> /dev/urandom... see
>> maradns-3.5.0020/deadwood-3.5.0020/src/Makefile.ubuntu2004:
>>
>> # Since
On 2022-06-08, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Montag, dem 06.06.2022 um 18:49 -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
>> p.s. Obviously, I picked the best random number.
> I beg to differ.
>> +-RandomPrime: RandomPrime.c
>> +- $(CC) -O3 -o RandomPrime RandomPrime.c
>> +-
>> +-DwRandPrime.h:
> As long as the script shows it's trying and explains why it takes
> time, it should be fine. It could offer a --continue option too :)
Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Definitely beats the two-step manual process
that we have to endure now.
Hi Maxime,
Thanks for the explanation! I am working on a patch. I'll send something
soon.
Regards,
Arun
Am Montag, dem 06.06.2022 um 18:49 -0700 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
> p.s. Obviously, I picked the best random number.
I beg to differ.
> +-RandomPrime: RandomPrime.c
> +- $(CC) -O3 -o RandomPrime RandomPrime.c
> +-
> +-DwRandPrime.h: RandomPrime
> +- if [ -e /dev/urandom ] ; then
Hi Vagrant,
> But there's one nervous-making issue this revealed; maradns embeds a
> random number at build time ... allegedly for systems that don't have
> /dev/urandom... see
> maradns-3.5.0020/deadwood-3.5.0020/src/Makefile.ubuntu2004:
>
> # Since some systems may not have /dev/urandom
Efraim Flashner 写道：
I like the idea of forcing the program to segfault if it looks
for
/dev/urandom and it isn't there more than distributing a
randomized
prime number.
+4
Or error out nicely. Don't let's ship such ‘features’.
Kind regards,
T G-R
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 11:17:47PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ludovic Courtès skribis:
>
> ‘guix weather -s i686-linux’ says 89% (which is underestimated, because
> it wrongfully checks for all the packages, including unsupported
> packages), which sounds good.
>
> We have to
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:11:54AM -0400, Brian Cully via Development of GNU
Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote:
>
> > > The upstream website says: "People like MaraDNS because it’s ...
> > > remarkably secure." [1] Since many distributions have the same
> > > issue,
> > > upstream
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 07:20:25AM +0200, Julien Lepiller wrote:
>
>
> On June 7, 2022 5:24:22 AM GMT+02:00, Felix Lechner
> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 6:50 PM Vagrant Cascadian
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> So, Debian's maradns package just removes this embedding of a "random"
> >>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 05:11:48PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Efraim,
>
> Efraim Flashner skribis:
>
> > As someone who has never used debbugs or emacs I find it daunting to try
> > to add it into my workflow. Currently I am subscribed to guix-patches
> > and I dump it into my
On Tuesday, June 7th, 2022 at 10:42 AM, Kaelyn
wrote:
[snip]
> > > I just took a few minutes and checked both repos out into a single
> > > working tree, and there aren't many commits unique to each
> > > repository. The official savannah repo has 5 commits since they
> > > diverged, with the 3
Hi Ludo'
Ludovic Courtès writes:
[...]
> OK, understood.
>
> I can think of two ways to reassure committers:
>
> 1. By having clear reviewer check lists (you’d do that if you tick all
> the boxes, you’re fine);
also a description of the review process used by you and other
experienced
Hi Arun,
Arun Isaac writes:
> Tooling aside, at least for me, I think there is an important emotional
> and psychological aspect to patch review. Maybe others share it too. So,
> I'll speak up.
Thanks a lot for your speak up!
> Guix has very high coding standards
Do you think other software
Hi Simon and all,
just a quick note about myself: I'm (still) not contributing with patch
reviews (and in general contributing too little) because in this period
of my "work life" I have little time, but things will hopefully
change...
IMHO the curent tooling is helpful and usable with a little
26 matches
Mail list logo
