<ng0>what's the guile way to achieve this: (when ssh? (setenv "CVS_RSH" "ssh")) ? I know right now this is wrong, because: 'warning: definition in expression context, where definitions are not allowed,'. I assume (setenv) can't be done conditionally, so I am reading more sources to understand what is done usually.
<civodul>problem is that it works by grovelling the log files, which is quite inefficient
<civodul>maybe we should do that on the daemon side
<g_bor>civodul: istm, that the project to rewrite the daemon would bring some benefits, wdyt?
<g_bor>it has been attemtpted severaly times, am I right?
<g_bor>civodul: I'm trying to track down the javadoc reproducibility problem.
<g_bor>It seems, that it has an option to disable timestamp generation, but it should be done at each site this tool is called. (i.e. we need to patch the build.xml in every package, where we are not generating one, but using the upstream one).
<g_bor>Another option would be to not use this option, but make the tool respect SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. This would involve patching jdk though.
<pkill9>that's only because I didn't know of a way to encrypt the root partition and have guix able to bootup, but apparentlyt hat is possible by setting the partition as a partition neccessary for boot
<georges-duperon>Unsurprisingly, Guix is licensed under the GPL. How does that affect the license of the recipes I write?
<georges-duperon>I'm asking because I usually release my code using the CC0 public domain, but I don't know if recipes are "linking" against the Guix libraries or other stuff that could prevent me from using the CC0.
<nckx>I absolutely think it's linking but don't trust me; ask somebody with an expensive degree ♪
<OriansJ>georges-duperon: well I don't think package recipes would qualify as linking anymore than writing a bash script means you are linking to the gpl. Now adding functionality to extend guix would be a different matter entirely.
<nckx>Mm. A better comparison is (heavily) using library code (which Guix is), or them being loadable modules, although that's already more of a stretch. Both would be considered linking. But we're all just randoes on the 'Net.
<nckx>But yrk is absolutely right that this doesn't invalidate your choice of licence.
<nckx>Hey Guix. Does anyone else run GuixSD from a spinning platter?
<nckx>& how many minutes does it take you to boot?
<yrk>nckx: always a backlog, unfortunately. bringing a new volunteer up to speed is hard because it requies a lot of guidance, and so if that volunteer drops out before being able to do independent work you've wasted a lot of effort
<yrk>nckx: no judgement on those volunteers though; everyone has a life to live and their own decisions to make
<rekado>georges-duperon: Guix package recipes are code, and they call procedures provided by the Guix libraries, so in my opinion it is clear that they are a derivative and should thus be under the GPL.
<rekado>but I’m very happy to say that I’m not a lawyer.