On 08/01/16 00:31, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Hi Ben,
Do you have an account on Savannah? If not, I invite you to create one
so we can give you write access to the repo. :-)
Sweet, thanks muchly.
My new savannah account name is benwoodcroft
I'll try not to mess things up too badly. Great to be
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:46 AM, Ricardo Wurmus
wrote:
>
> Ben Woodcroft writes:
>
>> On 02/01/16 01:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> [...]
>>> So I guess you (Ricardo?) can push it now.
> [...]
>> Thanks for pushing the patch.
>
> I did this just
Ben Woodcroft skribis:
> On 08/01/16 00:31, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hi Ben,
>>
>> Do you have an account on Savannah? If not, I invite you to create one
>> so we can give you write access to the repo. :-)
> Sweet, thanks muchly.
>
> My new savannah account name is
Hi Ben,
Do you have an account on Savannah? If not, I invite you to create one
so we can give you write access to the repo. :-)
Ludo’.
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Ben Woodcroft writes:
>
>> On 02/01/16 01:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> [...]
>>> So I guess you (Ricardo?) can push it now.
> [...]
>> Thanks for pushing the patch.
>
> I did this just now. Sorry for the delay.
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> On 02/01/16 01:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
>> So I guess you (Ricardo?) can push it now.
[...]
> Thanks for pushing the patch.
I did this just now. Sorry for the delay. Pushed as 7266848. Thanks,
Ben, for helping to make Ruby packages
On 02/01/16 01:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
Ben Woodcroft writes:
On 31/12/15 03:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Ben Woodcroft skribis:
On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
Unfortunately none of
Ricardo Wurmus skribis:
> Ben Woodcroft writes:
>
>> On 31/12/15 03:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> Ben Woodcroft skribis:
>>>
On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
> Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> On 31/12/15 03:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Ben Woodcroft skribis:
>>
>>> On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems
in Guix generally aren't. For
On 31/12/15 09:52, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
On 30/12/15 18:26, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
Ben Woodcroft writes:
The .gem file stored in GEM_HOME after install is both redundant and an
archive that stores timestamped files which makes builds
non-deterministic. So
delete it
On 31/12/15 03:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Ben Woodcroft skribis:
On 29/12/15 15:46, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems
in Guix generally aren't. For one, this is because .gem files are
archives whose contents are
Ben Woodcroft writes:
> From 3d23171d88b9f38c90efa469f6519b52b15a1d01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ben Woodcroft
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:27:33 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] build: ruby: Remove cached gem after install.
> The .gem file stored
Excellent.
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:56:06AM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
> On 30/12/15 10:51, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
> >Too ham-fisted?
> Maybe, but badly committed at least. Try this.
> From 3d23171d88b9f38c90efa469f6519b52b15a1d01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ben Woodcroft
On 29/12/15 17:18, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
Ben Woodcroft writes:
Unfortunately none of these builds are reproducible because rubygems in
Guix generally aren't. For one, this is because .gem files are archives
whose contents are timestamped.
I found the same problem with
On 30/12/15 10:51, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
Too ham-fisted?
Maybe, but badly committed at least. Try this.
>From 3d23171d88b9f38c90efa469f6519b52b15a1d01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ben Woodcroft
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:27:33 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] build: ruby: Remove
15 matches
Mail list logo