IRC channel logs
2014-03-07.log
back to list of logs
<davexunit>could anyone remind of when the appropriate time to propagate inputs is? <davexunit>I remember checking the library's pkgconfig .pc file <davexunit>but I don't remember what I learned from that <d232323>civodul: Weinholt uses SRFI-78 to test the base64 module. Should we bundle SRFI-78 with Guix, or should I rewrite the tests using SRFI-64? <civodul>d232323: if converting is fine with you, then let's do it <d232323>civodul: Why do I need to attach 'tests/store.log'? I thought that 'test-suite.log' includes everything, no? <civodul>actually tests/stores.log and test-suite.log are from Automake <civodul>so we need stores.log and test-suite.log <d232323>Okay, I'll attach 'store.log', then. <phant0mas>civodul: can I put some extra flag for a specific target in cross-gcc? <civodul>phant0mas: a little, see gcc-configure-flags-for-triplet in gcc.scm <phant0mas>I am need "--enable-build-with-cxx" and --disable-nls <phant0mas>btw what the difference between @(if libc and (if libc <phant0mas>one last thing, the hurd glibc will be a different package from the existing glibc in base.scm ,right? <civodul>ideally, the only differences would be the 'source' and 'inputs' fields <civodul>so you would do (define glibc/hurd (package (inherit glibc) (source ...) (inputs ...))) <civodul>tschwinge: do you think you could upload, say, glibc-hurd-2.19.tar.xz on alpha.gnu.org? <d232323>civodul: Should 'guix/scripts/susbtitute-binary.scm' export anything except 'guix-substitute-binary'? In the diff, I do it for the tests. But I also could use @@, should I? <civodul>we also need black-box tests in tests/store.scm though <civodul>i'm not sure if there were some in the last iteration <d232323>There definitely were some. In particular, 'parse-signature', 'verify-signature', 'read-narinfo', and 'write-narinfo'. <civodul>that's in tests/substitute-binary.scm right? <d232323>Nope, I'm still talking about 'guix/scripts/substitute-binary.scm'. <phant0mas>unless we get a tarball for glibc/hurd I have to use git fetch <phant0mas>how can I tell git fetch to download a specific branch? <mark_weaver>it couldn't be a branch anyway, it would have to be a tag or commit hash. <mark_weaver>hi civodul! how do you find out the correct sha256 hash, btw? <mark_weaver>is guix download or guix hash usable for git fetches? <mark_weaver>I suspect you can just use a commit hash instead of the hash. <phant0mas>"-bdb7a18d78b04ac3ef7a2d905485500f13bb69fb")) <mark_weaver>no, just (commit "bdb7a18d78b04ac3ef7a2d905485500f13bb69fb") <mark_weaver>the string-append thing was to construct the tag name. <phant0mas>and how do I get the correct sha256 hash for it now? <mark_weaver>well, pending a better response from civodul: try and and get the real hash from the error message :) <civodul>mark_weaver: yes, "guix hash -r" on the checkout without .git <civodul>or from the error message, indeed :-) <phant0mas>civodul : before you told me the name of the recipe should be define glibc/hurd <davexunit>I don't like define-public. makes it hard to see at a glance what a module's public API is. <davexunit>I like to put the public variables in the #:export list in the define-module form. <phant0mas>while the scm file compiles succesfully with my changes, when I try to build the recipe I get the error unkown package <rigelk>hi there :) what is phant0mas trying to do ? <mark_weaver>(if you want to build it with "guix build" or "guix package") <mark_weaver>the name passed to "guix build" or "guix package" looks up the (name "blah") field of the package, not the variable name. <phant0mas>How can I build it with the use of build -e? <sriharsha>phant0mas, you have to use the -e option like this -e '(@ (gnu packages <filename without .scm>) <package>))' <rigelk>what is the purpose of `make sync-synoses` ? <mark_weaver>well, for GNU packages there's a central place where the synopses are kept, so maintainers can update them in one place instead of having to notify GNU Guix, GNU GSRC, etc. <mark_weaver>(I don't know the full list of places that currently make use of this central store of GNU package synopses, but it's more than just Guix anyway). <mark_weaver>rigelk: a couple of comments: (1) you shouldn't build things as root, just the guix-daemon and "make install" <mark_weaver>(2) that paste cannot be a true paste, because you mispelled "sync-synopses" <mark_weaver>(3) if you want to do development on guix like adding packages, then you should be working from a git checkout. <mark_weaver>I guess that you modified gnu-system.am, which triggered a re-run of automake, and then it doesn't like that your automake is different than the one that was used to create the tarball. <mark_weaver>in git, it's been renamed to "sync-descriptions", btw. <mark_weaver>to clarify (1), you should build things as a normal user, and only use root to run guix-daemon and to run "make install". <rigelk>thanks a lot for the info mark_weaver :) i think i'm gonna make a clean git install from now on. enough playing around. <mark_weaver>so I recommend doing "git clone git://git.savannah.gnu.org/guix.git" and then in the guix directory: ./bootstrap && ./configure ... && make <rigelk>however, as crazy as it seems, `make sync-synoses` works as `make sync-synopses`. Btw, the former is written in the slides :/ <mark_weaver>the string "sync-synoses" does not occur anywhere in the 0.5 tarball. <mark_weaver>is "make" doing some kind of auto spelling correction?!? *mark_weaver doesn't understand <rigelk>mark_weaver: is a `dot` command needed to `make` guix ? <mark_weaver>for now, you can just touch the file it's trying to make, or copy it from the tarball. <mark_weaver>it's just an image of a dependency graph, for the manual. <rigelk>mark_weaver: thanks for the tip ; i `touch`ed the file and compiled successfully.