On 2021-04-25, Jack Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2021, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2021-04-25, Jack Hill wrote:
>>> I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To
>>> build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
>>>
>>> ```
>>> This is Release 2.5 of
I have asked the FSF licensing lab about this in RT #1718940
Best,
Jack
On Sun, 25 Apr 2021, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
On 2021-04-25, Jack Hill wrote:
I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To
build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
```
This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
License is hereby granted
Vagrant Cascadian writes:
On 2021-04-25, Jack Hill wrote:
I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for
Guix. To
build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
```
This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
License is hereby granted to use this
Hi Leo,
Leo Famulari writes:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:25:21PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>> In general, I think that the license field of a package should include
>> all licenses that cover any files in its source distribution (by which I
>> mean the output of "guix build --source").
>>
On 2021-04-25, Jack Hill wrote:
> I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To
> build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
>
> ```
> This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
>
> License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute
Hi
Your advices helped me think more clearly.
There was no need to create or modify structures other than what I was
already changing. I now return an alist instead of a list on the
derivation-differences-* functions on comparison.scm (for outputs,
inputs and sources). It helped to simplify the
Hi Jack,
Jack Hill writes:
> I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To
> build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
>
> ```
> This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
>
> License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:25:21PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> In general, I think that the license field of a package should include
> all licenses that cover any files in its source distribution (by which I
> mean the output of "guix build --source").
>
> My rationale is that it is the source
Hi Ricardo,
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
>> I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for
>> Guix. To build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following
>> license:
>
> This is also used by Boost.
>
> I don’t know what the license is called, but the build tool is not
> part of
Hi jgart,
Your meetup reminder to guix-devel@ was held for moderation:
guix-devel-boun...@gnu.org writes:
From: jg...@dismail.de on Sat Apr 24 12:28:55 2021
Subject: Re: Guix Packaging Meetup [...]
Cause: Too many recipients to the message
It had 11. I've approved it now. I hope the meetup
Hi Guix!
If you're free come package with us today at 2PM EST:
https://events.nixnet.services
Hope to see you there :)
jgart
https://board.disroot.org/project/guix-packaging/timeline
April 18, 2021 1:40 PM, "jgart" wrote:
> Hi Guix!
>
> LibreMiami is hosting a guix packaging meetup next
Hey Guix,
Just for fun, I tried putting the following in my services:
(service qemu-bitfmt-service-type
(qemu-bitfmt-configuration (platforms %qemu-platforms)))
However, after reconfiguration, shepherd fails to start qemu-binfmt:
$ sudo herd start qemu-binfmt
herd: exception
Hello,
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2021 at 11:10 AM Christopher Baines wrote:
>> I did think about trying to include something about Cuirass, but I don't
>> have a clear picture of it's scope or purpose, so I'm not really the
>> right person to attempt to write authoritatively about it.
>
> OK, fair
I just want to add my 2 cents to the discussion. Officially Neovim supports
only
Lua 5.1 as its extension language according to the manual (`:h lua-intro`):
> The Lua 5.1 language is builtin and always available.
Using LuaJIT allows the use of some extensions to Lua 5.1, but plugins relying
Hi Jack,
I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for
Guix. To build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following
license:
This is also used by Boost.
I don’t know what the license is called, but the build tool is not
part of the built package, so I think it doesn’t
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:33:58AM -0400, Jack Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2020, Jack Hill wrote:
>
> > Hi Guix,
> >
> > I'm wondering why we use Lua 5.1 instead of LuaJIT for neovim? It seems
> > that upstream prefers LuaJIT given the non-default configure flag we
> > use[0] and their FAQ[1].
Hi Guix,
I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To
build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
```
This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
freely, as long as this
18 matches
Mail list logo
