<tadni`>jxself: It is very weird, because I keep on bouncing back and forth between almost passing out and being wide awake. I've had no real sugar or caffine today... so, not sure what's up. Got maybe 2 hours of sleep, last night though.
<tadni`>I mean, don't specific builds kinda take that place anyway. Like if we inhreient emacs and want to change a build option ...? I guess it's not easy to compound config options on top of eachother though...
<davexunit>tadni`: as far as I understand, in gentoo a user can simply say "I don't want KDE things" and the package manager takes care to ensure that, and package maintainers write packages that know what to do with certain use flags.
<tadni`>What does "not wanting KDE things mean"? Refuse to install KDE Software?
<davexunit>tadni`: let's say a package had an optional dependency on a KDE library.
<mongrol>ok. I'll get back in my cage now :) Don't want to get all ranty over IRC :)
<Steap_>civodul: Linus is not known for his careful wording
<mongrol>changing topic, I've been looking into learning Guile after finding the excellent Sly gamdev framework. Are the best resources on schemers.org? Or is there a "leanr guile in X minutes type thing?
<civodul>i think schemers.org has the good resources, yes
<mongrol>or can anyone recommend a route for a non-lisper coming from C++/python/lua
<civodul>"X minutes" may not be enough, if you really want to invest in it
<civodul>"Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" is the most recommended reading
<zdavis>Awhile ago I mentioned adding a "build iso image" feature. Turns out it is significantly complicated by guix using really long file names in /gnu/store/*. It should still be possible, but will not be as quick and easy as I had hoped.
<taylanub>zdavis: what kind of file/path name limitation does ISO 9660 have?
<zdavis>I'm starting to think it's isolinux that is having problems with the long file names. If I copy the kernel and initrd to /, I can boot but then get a panic when it tries to run the boot script.
<zdavis>I'm willing to give up pointing the bootloader to the files in /gnu/store, but I don't understand what is going on with the panic when running the giux boot script
<zdavis>never mind, it's dying before the boot script.
<rgrau>question: does it deserve a 0.8.1 release ?
<rgrau>I'm stuck there also, and having a more friendly starting would enable more ppl to test it and not run away (don't know how much work it is to roll a new distro)
<Sleep_Walker>well, I like that idea of attracting people but I'm afraid there is still lot of work to do
<rekado>are you running Guix (as the GNU system) in "production" or can you recommend a minimal GNU/Linux distribution I could use with Guix (where the distro's package management would be used for all the missing stuff)?
<jgay>well it is complicated, right? You have two things going on. One is a user installable operating system that consists of a bunch of different programs. And the second is a functional package management toolchain
<civodul>exactly, so that hints at having two different names
<tadni`>Wait, call the actual "Distribution" Guix GNU/Linux?
<tadni`>taylanub: The problem there is, that they (Nix/NixOS) are a one off -- they are not a part of any Grand project and really the only big thing they are doing is Nix. The don't have their own init-system and too, they aren't trying to act as somewhat of an organinzing body for a bigger project in any way.
<tadni`>RMS seems to (or at least was reffered to) suggest "Guixotic". Does this even work in the way geek is supposed to be pronnounced?
<tadni`>I mean, from what I can understand of RMS on this current thread -- it seems more-so he fears that an "official distro" may be confused with the "GNU Operating System" to start, as is. And more-or-less deeming it the official GNU OS is realyl problematic to him./
<tadni`>Maybe we shouldn't even call it a distro then? Maybe a Distribution Platform, that offers default images?
<jxself>But it shouldn't be bothersome to him because he started the GNU Project to make a GNU OS.
<jxself>It finally shows up and he's like "Meh, maybe not."
<tadni`>jxself: I think he fears that decisions may pop up, that he doesn't back -- and might cause tension and people expect him to be dictator for life, because he's RMS and they call themselves "The GNU Operating System".
<Sleep_Walker>GNU Guix sounds right, it doesn't feel like implying - that's the GNU OS RMS was talking about
<jxself>GNU Guix sounds right for the name of the package manager. :)
<tadni`>Schemata? But that would imply a lot more Scheme, me thinks.
<taylanub>jxself: I think the thing is, there's this argument (or fact) that many/most distros out there are in fact GNU/Linux distros, and even outside those GNU is everywhere (including Apple OS X O_o), so "GNU" is really ubiquitous, and calling any single entity "GNU" would imply that GNU is not in fact ubiquitous.
<tadni`>You could argue that this "GNU" is the canonical implementation of GNU, but I doubt RMS is for that.
<tadni`>Again, you can reason out of it and just call it "GNU Distro" but not "The GNU Distro". The first example being it is just a GNU project, called distro, that implemnts a version of the GNU system. Not /the/ GNU System.
<jxself>If this isn't the GNU Operating System we're working on then it shouldn't be on gnu.org. Maybe moved to nongnu or something.
<tadni`>taylanub: I mean, has anyone explained this line of logic to him? RMS is mostly reasonable, I don't think he'd be upset if we were clear in not claiming to be /the/ GNU system, just a distribution maintained officially by some GNU hackers.
*civodul goes to bed, thinking about the Distro Without a Name
<tadni`>jxself: It's still a GNU project, is it not?
<taylanub>tadni`: it seems rather sarcastic to say "the project is just called Distro, and since it's a GNU package, it's called GNU Distro."
<tadni`>The name itself overly sappy, but the actual meaning of the name shows how we can't fully get our shit together. :^)
<taylanub>when RMS explicitly tries to avoid having it sanctioned as *the* GNU OS.
<jxself>And so we must conclude that there will never be a GNU Operating System?
<jxself>And so what, then, is the GNU Project working on?
<tadni`>taylanub: I mean, my general solution there woulld be call it a distribution platform then. But I don't see either being bad ... really, as long as we explicitly specify we are not the official GNU system.
<taylanub>jxself: you see, other distributions call themselves Foobar GNU/Linux, and we *could* drop the Linux because Linux-libre is a GNU package, but we'd still be left with Foobar GNU, because we're "just" a distribution of GNU. in other terms, GNU has become so spread-out and ubiquitous, that there cannot be any "GNU" OS anymore. I think that might be RMS's logic...
<tadni`>jxself: Unless RMS has a major change of heart, or who ever defaults to/if anyone defaults to such a position, until after RMS drops. :^P
<Sleep_Walker>ugh, does name really have to follow some not followed taxonomy?
<tadni`>I mean, if it's a GNU project ... it's implied that all the base packages are probably going to be owned by GNU.
<taylanub>tadni`: we *might* be able to get off by "not giving it a name" and using the abbreviation "distro" or the word "distribution" for downloadable files and stuff...
<tadni`>Sleep_Walker: So Linux-Libre and Hurd are both part of GNU, GNU would be the only tax'd name. That being said, again, if it is a GNU project. GNU XYZ would be assumed already to be all GNU at that level.
<taylanub>gnu.org would have a button "click here to get a distribution of the GNU system" and it would download a file called gnu-distribution-2014-12.iso or some such :P
<tadni`>That makes it seem like an official OS to me.
<taylanub>but I guess that's also just implicitly sitting on the pure "GNU" name.
<taylanub>there are several GNU OS distributions already. what sets Guix apart *could* be said to be a technicality...
<jxself>Third parties taking stuff and making their own version doesn't the GNU system make.
<taylanub>it'd be a rather significant/big "technicality" in that case but just explaining the point of view
<tadni`>jxself: That is a decent point, but again, a fear that taylanub stated earlier -- is that it might in part, seem to invalidate this GNU/Linux naming scheme. If we declare an official operating system implementation.
<taylanub>jxself: I think the view is exactly that it does. gNewSense and Trisquel are both distributions of the GNU OS, and Guix will be another. Guix is ""merely"" less dependent of a non-GNU GNU/Linux distro like Debian or Ubuntu...
<jxself>In those cases gnu.org should be updated so that they're not called variants of the gnu system.
<taylanub>hm, not sure about the difference between "variant" and "distribution"...
<taylanub>variant/distribution/version, all seem thin lines
<jxself>Imagine the Debian Project. They exist to work on the Debian GNU/Linux distribution. Someone can fork it, and make their own variant of the Debian GNU/Linux distribution, but that variant is not itself Debian.
<tadni`>Okay, I've got short explinations for GNU Jitsu, Wave, DAWN, and Ludovix, so far.
<taylanub>I think one might have a go at suggesting RMS to use a wording on the gnu.org download page such as: "a complete distribution of the GNU system as managed by the GNU project can be downloaded _here_(link). for some other variants of the GNU system, see below..."
<jxself>But that raises the issue that some variant is given preference over another.
<jxself>Which is something RMS has wanted to avoid ever since the free distro list started.
<jxself>Listed in alphabetical order, none are shown any special preference over any other...
<taylanub>now I'm starting to see your position :P given those "variants" aren't GNU projects, not hosted on gnu.org, but we are, that's one concrete thing to justify granting us that status