Hi Guixers,
Should we include the documentation license (cc0) for GNU MedaGoblin in the
package definition?
What is guix's policy on including license information for software
documentation
if it is under a different license than the code?
Hello András,
András Vöröskői writes:
> Hi,
>
> I am running guix on a rpi4 machine, so substitute availability is
> quite important to me, as building packages takes a while and not fun
> at all :-)
>
> The aarch64-linux target looks quite bad on CI, but if I understand it
> correctly it could
Matthew Brooks 写道：
Thanks! I didn't realize there were two versions of the manual,
and had been checking the stable one.
This state is extremely confusing and should be improved. How did
you search/browse to the ‘stable’ manual?
More generally: why did you end up loading a browser to look
Thanks! I didn't realize there were two versions of the manual, and had been
checking the stable one. The /devel one did have the new method, and it worked
fine.
On Fri, 03 Sep 2021 16:16:27 -0400
Julien Lepiller wrote:
> Instead of the cold reply, here's an explanation. The /manual
Hi,
I am running guix on a rpi4 machine, so substitute availability is
quite important to me, as building packages takes a while and not fun
at all :-)
The aarch64-linux target looks quite bad on CI, but if I understand it
correctly it could be vastly improved by just restarting a couple of
