Ivan Vilata i Balaguer (2022-12-14 10:43:46 +0100) wrote:
> Since it's unlikely that the file will change its block arrangement on disk,
> and enlarging it requires another invocation of `mkswap`, it's probably enough
> to tell the user to check for such warnings on `mkswap` invocation (in
Howdy!
Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
> Well, that is what I did, pulled guix to the curren wip-guile-ssh-0.16
> branch (which contains an update to guile-ssh 0.16 and updates guix to
> use a commit containing that), and managed to guix copy from one machine
> to another, so I *think* we are good!
Hi,
Stephen Paul Weber skribis:
> It seem that url-fetch will work without a hash (that is, with (sha256
> #f)) but git-fetch will not.
(sha256 #f) is not a documented use case. :-)
> As near as I can tell this is because git-fetch uses a fixed
> derivation build going via nix/build.cc stuff
Hi,
Antonio Carlos Padoan Junior skribis:
> I would like to give some feedback concerning this issue I faced.
> I found an offending package definition in my channel (but the issue is only
> present when using -L argument):
>
> (define-public gtklp
> (let ((toolchain (specification->package
Wondering what necessitated this change from the old variable name to a
new name...
commit c04528d2a2597d79278833f3607c806278253446
Author: Maxim Cournoyer
Date: Tue Dec 20 21:25:27 2022 -0500
gnu: u-boot-am335x-evm-boneblack: Fix variable name.
* gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
Anyone knows who is/was working on this and what happened to the
project?
The site only links to general Guix pages.
https://nlnet.nl/project/GUIX-securitytracking/
On 2022-12-21, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Vagrant Cascadian skribis:
>
>> Well, that is what I did, pulled guix to the curren wip-guile-ssh-0.16
>> branch (which contains an update to guile-ssh 0.16 and updates guix to
>> use a commit containing that), and managed to guix copy from one machine
>>
