<mekeor>why is it that both the online and my local manual of guix document the scheme procedure network-manager-service while current guix doesn't include that procedure but instead offers network-manager-service-type?
<mekeor>so, ~/.config/guix/latest is a link to /gnu/store/FOO-guix-latest. but `whereis guix` reports /gnu/store/BAR-profile/bin/guix.
<mekeor>there is /gnu/store/BAR-profile/share/doc but there is no /gnu/store/FOO-guix-latest/share/doc
<Apteryx>Wouldn't FOO-guix-latest be another symlink pointing to BAR-profile/bin/guix?
<Apteryx>Quick and dirty solution to this annoying capslock problem on the Apple Wireless Keyboard: setxkbmap -option ctrl:nocaps
<Apteryx>This makes it a CTRL key instead of a CAPSLOCK key. Problem solved!
<Apteryx>Interesting thing though was that it was working great on Ubuntu. So they must have some patch/configuration to fix that behavior.
<Apteryx>I have a strange problem. In my PATH, I append $HOME/.local/bin before $HOME/.guix-profile/bin. I have a GnuCash installed in my user profile. Now I create an executable bash script with the exact same name (gnucash) to wrap the original binary and use a different locale.
<Apteryx>If I do `which gnucash`, it shows the wrapped version (script) in my .local/bin folder.
<Apteryx>If I just type `gnucash` at the command line, it starts the original (unwrapped) binary. Why is that?
<efraim>I applied manolis's patch locally and rebuilt the aarch64 bootstrap binaries and uploaded them to flashner.co.il/guix/..., now its time to change up the patches and get it rebuilt on the arm board
<efraim>civodul: is there a command I can run to try to cross build the cross-build packages?
<htgoebel>civodul: Shouldn't "guix environment guix --ad-hoc ..." do this?
<htgoebel>civodul: Notable: I'm *not* using GuixSD, but using guix on top of y standard GNU/Linux distribution.
<nckx>I'm updating a package with ‘#:tests? #f ;no tests’. That's true, but not disabling them results in 0 tests being run successfully in ~1s. So I'd prefer to remove this line to save future updaters the trouble of checking whether there are new tests. Is this acceptable?
<erliphant>thanks catonano - I stepped away. I understand that they are scheme - I've written some myself but I'm not sure where exactly the build daemon is reading them from.
<catonano>erliphant: it's a whole issue, how to convey stuff to the daemon. There are some footages in which Ludo talks about that. Staging. Gexps and the such. I had troubles reading the code myself, some time ago
<ng0>I review compton now for the last task of today :)
<ng0>there's too much unreviewed and I'm not helping by only sending instead of reviewing more myself
<nliadm>so this is more of a guile question, but can I programmatically create the first argument to define-public? I want to have a package built at a bunch of different versions, and it'd be nice to be able to just write a function that takes a package, a list of (version,hash), and a function to make an origin
<bavier`>nliadm: that could be achieved with macros
<nliadm>I had a feeling it could, but I can't figure out how to create the name to bind the package to. my attempt with gensym didn't work
<civodul>nliadm: u-boot.scm is a good example (it doesn't use macros)
<nliadm>although it's very possible I did it wrong
<nliadm>that doesn't quite do what I want. the name of the package is still hardcoded, down at the bottom
<nliadm>er, the symbol? the name the package is bound to is written in the source
<nliadm>taylan: thanks! but would it be possible to construct <var-name>?
<taylan>buenouanq: I got no clue then. I doubt it's related to guix. did you check in 'top' or so to make sure it's not another process causing it?
<buenouanq>it only happens when I run dd with bs=4M (haven't tested other bs= values yes) - when I was successfully able to open top while it was running once, nothing looked weird or out of place
<taylan>nliadm: with syntax-case rather than syntax-rules, yes. stylistically, I'd prefer the defined variable names to appear literally in the scheme file to be honest, but I'm not the style authority of guix so... example incoming
<taylan>well they should be human-readable, no? or do you mean like (gensym "foobar")?
<nliadm>does that matter? on the guix command line, you still specify names and versions using the "name" and "version" parts of the package, right?
<taylan>hmm, yes. it might still be desired to have clean variable names. but if not, then generating the name becomes easier. gensym itself won't directly work, as scheme uses identifier objects rather than raw symbols to denote identifiers at compile time, but yeah...
<taylan>it would be (datum->syntax stx (gensym)) I guess
<taylan>(datum->syntax will turn a symbol into an identifier object)