IRC channel logs


back to list of logs

<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: what are you struggling with?
<rekado>annoyingly, I spent a lot of time on getting Kerberos (with KDC and NFS server on the same host) to work, but the strace trick only fixes the mount when using sec=sys, not sec=krb5.
<rekado>I’m guessing that running under strace prevents rpc.mountd from dropping privileges, so it runs with root privileges and thus can access the target file system without problems.
<doubleloop>rekado: the machine supports EFI, so I figured I'd go with it.. I did try a legacy BIOS install and that did work fine, so maybe I should just go with that?
<doubleloop>Interested as to why the error occurs though, not had any EFI problem with other distros
<rekado>I don’t understand this part well enough to help figure out what’s wrong, I’m afraid.
<rekado>You may want to write to to get the attention of people who probably know better.
<doubleloop>rekado: thanks, will do!
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: I had ssh root@<server> prompt me for my gpg key password. I had somehow set it up. Today it asked me for the <server> password
<joshuaBPMan>I guess I don't know how to start the ssh-agent. Or if I should use ssh-agent or gpg-agent.
<joshuaBPMan>and I guess I should use .bash_profile to start one of those...
<joshuaBPMan>I can't seem to find one definitive guide that says, here's how you use ssh-agent or gpg-agent to use your gpg-keys to authenticate to a server that works.
<joshuaBPMan>linode has a guide that uses an deprecated gpg option.
<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: so you have --enable-ssh-support in gpg-agent.conf, and "export SSH_AUTH_SOCK=$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/gnupg/S.gpg-agent.ssh" in .bashrc?
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: I do have --enable-ssh-support in gpg-agent.conf.
<mbakke>I guess the problem the second time you tried to ssh was that gpg-agent was not running
<mbakke>it will start automatically when you use your gpg key
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: that seems to make it work...again.
<joshuaBPMan>I also had an option in gpg-agent.conf that was not wanting to work apparently.
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: you just showed me how to use gpg-agent then right?
<mbakke>I also have GPG_TTY=$(tty) in .bashrc for reasons long forgotten, but I think it was important
<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: apart from the ssh-add step, I think so...would you like to document the setup with a blog post? :-)
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: you bet I would!
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: are you inviting me to post a blog on the guix blog?
<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: that would be awesome :-)
<joshuaBPMan>there's a line that mentions why it is important to add GPG_TTY=$(tty)
<mbakke>right, it's in the guix manual as well ;-)
<joshuaBPMan>is it?
<mbakke>errh, I mean, as in "man gpg-agent" :P
<joshuaBPMan>also, why do we need to export SSH_AUTH_SOCK in bashrc? why not .bash_profile?
<mbakke>bash_profile is probably better, actually
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: thanks! It's working now!
<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: excellent :)
<joshuaBPMan>well, maybe not...
<joshuaBPMan>I just killed the agent...though
<joshuaBPMan>give me a second to fiddle with's probably still working
<joshuaBPMan>I'm going to logout and login again to see if it is working.
<joshuaBPMan>well still having issues.
<joshuaBPMan>I guess my server might have kicked me out for a moment. I might have tried to log in too many times and failed.
<mbakke>joshuaBPMan: I guess what's missing is a reliable way to start gpg-agent on login?
<joshuaBPMan>mbakke: correct.
<joshuaBPMan>I will have to figure that out. There's enough guides out there, I'm sure one has the solution.
<Minall>Hello guix!
<Minall>I'm trying to create a file in /etc in my next reconfigure, I've created an 'etc-service-type'
<Minall>But when trying to reconfigure, I get 'more than one etc service type'
<Minall>What should I do?
<jgibbons[m]>One group of the filters just says "gpl". What version should I assume it means?
<jgibbons[m]>Permission was given to GPL them in November 2000
<jgibbons[m]>The files all say "Reproduction permitted so long as this notice is retained."
<jgibbons[m]>It's below a disclaimer that the filters are meant for fun, and a copyright notice.
<jgibbons[m]> gpl1+ it is.
***catonano_ is now known as catonano
<PotentialUser-28>is this the right place to get some help with post install issues??
<bandali>sure, though the channel seems kind of quiet right now
<bandali>if you don’t get the help you need, try asking tomorrow morning
<bandali>or perhaps email
<PotentialUser-28>great thanks
<PotentialUser-28>so I Installed guixsd using libvirt but on and sd card
<PotentialUser-28>int the vm install it showed up as sda
<PotentialUser-28>but booting on real hardware it cannot find the my-root
<PotentialUser-28>probably because the mmc-block module is not loaded
<PotentialUser-28>was looking for a quick way to add that module to the initrd
<PotentialUser-28>or I should say the proper way
<bandali>hmm, not sure
<PotentialUser-28>thanks anyways ... i will keep reading the manual ... and figure it out eventually
<bandali>sorry again i couldn’t be of help
<bandali>fingers crossed people would be able to help if you try asking again later
<bandali>or post to the list
<PotentialUser-28>Hey not a worry, I think I might have just figured it out. by the way thanks for being friendly and trying to help in the first place
<rekado_>ugh, so rpc.mountd behaves differently when it’s run with “--foreground”
<rekado_>it can’t mount anything in that case
<rekado_>running it under strace or removing “--foreground” fixes it.
<brendyyn>nckx: Turns out I'm stupid. My system might never have broken in the first place. You see there is this 120GiB msata drive in my laptop that broke a long time ago and became invisible. no idea why. anyway sometimes it magically comes back and appears undear fdisk. This time somehow the boot order changed in the bios and i was actually booting from a remenant grub on that drive. no wondering reconfiguring didn't
<brendyyn>achieve anything.
<brendyyn>i guess ill try reconfiguring once more to see if i can break it again
***MinceR_ is now known as MinceR
<roptat>hi guix!
<efraim>ugh I just want to separate all the rust packages into hundreds of sources and tens of packages and have to do dependency resolution by hand based on what it wants at build time. Or based on the Cargo.lock file.
<civodul>Hello Guix!
<efraim>~52000 lines in /etc/hosts.deny on my debian server from denyhosts
<efraim>I'd change it to deny all and only allow myself but I don't have a static IP or feel like fixing it from the webconsole if I'm somewhere else
<efraim>civodul, rekado_: those java bootstrap patches can be hundreds of more builds
<civodul>efraim: oh? oh!
<civodul>we can work around that
*civodul looks
<efraim>civodul: hundreds of NEW builds
<efraim>as in, builds that before were locked behind the java bootstrap process, as in its good
<civodul>right, but that was actually triggering a rebuild of icedtea@2
<civodul>efraim: i pushed a don't-rebuild-it-all followup commit
<civodul>but i think there were other commits that triggered a rebuild
<civodul>oh well
<truby>I'm trying to add a configure option to a package by inheriting from it, is there an easy way to just change the configure-flags without copying over the whole of the arguments field when inheriting? I tried `(acons #:configure-flags ... package-arguments)` but that doesn't seem to work
<nckx>truby: There is. See fftw-openmpi for a simple example.
<truby>ah, fab! that's exacltly what I'm looking for thanks :-)
<nckx>I keep getting ‘guix offload: error: corrupt input while restoring archive from #<input-output: channel (open) 2facfc0>’ errors. ‘guix offload test|status’ work fine.
<civodul>nckx: strace the damn thing on the server side :-)
<nckx>civodul: Hah! Guess what I'm doing (not sure what I'll do to parse the huge output; grep I guess).
<civodul>heh, i feel like it do most of debugging with pk and strace
<civodul>that tells a lot :-)
<nckx>civodul: What else do you use?
<g_bor>Hello guix!
<sneek>Welcome back g_bor, you have 1 message.
<sneek>g_bor, sirmacik1 says: thanks! will you be able to show me your config.scm anyway?
<civodul>nckx: for debugging? not much
<g_bor>I have been looking around the issue tracker, and found the issue where we have the problem of converting a kenrel panick to a failing exit code for qemu.
<g_bor>I think I found a possible workaround, but not sure how much pain would be to implement it.
<g_bor>It boils down to that we can enable the watchdog. On a kernel panic the watchdog will expire, and we could catch the watchdog expired event from qmp.
<nckx>No GDB (would GDB ‘see’ the Guile programme or just the interpreter state)? No guile --listen=1337 code whispering? Damn. I was hoping for some insight into the wizarding world.
<nckx>g_bor: [barging in without context] Have you looked into the pvpanic driver?
<nckx>Not that I don't appreciate the baroque, er, beauty of that watchdog hack.
<g_bor>nckx: ok, I will have a look. I noticed that it exists, what caught my eye on the other approach is that it is much better documented.
<g_bor>nckx: otherwise the method of catching the event is the same.
<g_bor>And it looks like we are missing only that.
<g_bor>i.e. we are expecting the qemu to exit failure, but it sends a qmp event instead, and the exits success.
<g_bor>The bug where this comes up is when a disk-image is created with too low ram, a corrupt image is created, and a success is returned.
<pinoaffe>when I run `guix pull`, it says guix pull: error: symlink: File exists: "/var/guix/profiles/per-user/pino/current-guix"
<nckx>g_bor: Thanks for working on a fix! I'm only worried that the watchdog approach will cause slow machines (amplified by the fact that KVM on low-end machines seems disproportionately slower) to time out.
<pinoaffe>what might the cause be?
<g_bor>nckx: you are right, and now that you borught it to my attention I intend to use pvpanic.
<g_bor>This is actually already done by Ludo's patch.
<nckx>pinoaffe: I've seen that happen after running ‘sudo guix pull’. The easy fix was to delete the symlink in the error.
<nckx>Then run ‘guix pull’ again.
<g_bor>The only missing piece is the qmp stuff.
<nckx>pinoaffe: To be safe, save the result of ‘readlink `which guix`’ to the clipboard to be safe, in case you get ‘guix: command not found’ after deleting it.
<nckx>s/one to be safe/oops/
<pinoaffe>nckx: aight, might've forgotten a -E at some point
<pinoaffe>removing it (and chowning some cached git files to my user account) seems to have done the trick
<nckx>pinoaffe: Right! I forgot about .cache/guix (I just removed it). Glad it worked out 🙂
<Alpha66>Hello, I'm having a problem with 'guix system reconfigure /etc/config.scm'
<roptat>hi Alpha66! I don't necessarily have a lot of time to spare, but can you tell us more about the problem you have, and share your configuration, for instance on
<Alpha66>Hello roptat! It goes through the whole reconfigure procedure, but fails at the end after making the new system current. Here's the last 3 lines:
<Alpha66>'making '/gnu/store/[hash]-system' the current system...'
<Alpha66>'setting up setuid programs in '/run/setuid-programs'...'
<Alpha66>'guix system: error: copy-file: No such file or directory: "/run/setuid-programs/freqset" '
<Alpha66>If I reboot, there's a new entry in GRUB for the system, which is the new default, and nothing seems to be out of order. Is this going to be a problem for me?
<Alpha66>I'm a bit short on time, too; so I'll hold off on the configuration for now. There's nothing special in it, it's produced by the graphical installer 1.0.1.
<roptat>Alpha66, there's nothing coming to mind to explain that right now... if nobody here can help you, can you email I don't think this is very serious, because it happens after creating the new generation of the system
<roptat>probably some programs that are supposed to be setuid will not be, but that's all
<roptat>I don't know where that comes from though
<Alpha66>Ok. If I still have the problem after the next reconfigure, I'll post on the mailing list.
<Alpha66>Thanks for the help and have a good day!
<efraim>wait, isn't freqset from enlightenment?
<efraim>not sure why it'd fail, it works for me. which of course doesn't help Alpha66 when they come back
<jmarciano>hello. I would ask if I can switch easily to Guix from other system?
<jmarciano>especially /home partition I wish to keep intact.
<jmarciano>is there some way to designate partitions in easy manner during installation from USB stick?
<brendyyn>jmarciano: You will need to look at the manual and examples to develop your own operating-system definition, including the appropriate file-systems and bootloader parts
<jmarciano>is it there? I cannot find partitioning
<jmarciano>can I just use ready partitions?
<brendyyn>yes, guix its self does not take part in partitioning your hard drive, you have to do that yourself
<brendyyn>yes you can use your partitions as is
<jmarciano>alright, do you have experience how long will process take if I need ? It will start downloading right? Like how much of data? 1 GB?
<brendyyn>i think you would have to move existing operating system files, so that guix doesnt conflict when it tries to install the bootloader for example
<brendyyn>jmarciano: it generally downloads quite a lot and takes a bit of time. you may prefer to start by defininng a command-line only basic system first so you can get it working, then after rebooting, try setting up X and all that
<jmarciano>yes like that
<brendyyn>its likely it will also compile some software from source
<jmarciano>the existing operating system files would get deleted I think
<jmarciano>aha yes OK
<jmarciano>I have used guix package manager, but not yet Guix as system
<jmarciano>yes, it was problem with downloading, especially in under developed countries where data is expensive or speed is low
<brendyyn>actually it will not delete your existing system, but probably just make a mess by mixing them all together
<davexunit>tried to install freecad but it failed because the coin3d package has a hash mismatch for its source code.
<nckx>Hm, why does that ring a huge bell…
<quiliro>nckx: because that happened to me too and I told you about it?
<quiliro>nckx: o/
<nckx>Oh, because I opened an issue in their tracker. *palms face*
<nckx>quiliro: \o Possible!
<nckx>After that response, I'll just change the hash to whatever it is now.
<quiliro>they do not have a source release
<nckx>They do not have a release, period.
<nckx>That's how I read it.
<quiliro>at least when they posted on sep 28
<nckx>However, I don't have the time or the interest to investigate why we then ship a 4.0 package.
<quiliro>how about ?
<nckx>quiliro: I don't understand.
<nckx>That's the tarball we currently use.
<quiliro>but you said it has changed...did I understand correctly?
<nckx>But upstream says: ‘We haven’t released version Coin 4.0 as IMHO lots of work need to be done on the documentation part and finishing the migration to CMake.’
<nckx>So they are either confused or that's not an official release.
<nckx>quiliro: Yes.
<nckx>It's not a stable archive at all, but a snapshot (I'll stop repeating the response now, interested folks can follow the link above to read it :).
<nckx>So /me is now reading up on hg-fetch and what ‘commits’ are in Mercurial to end this mess 🙂
<quiliro>good...but i still do not understand...let me investigate more
<nckx>quiliro: What's unclear?
<nckx>What Guix calls coin3D@4.0.0 insn't actually 4.0.0; it's 3.9.9-dev… (or 4.0.0-rc1234… if you will) and changes every time someone pushes a new commit. Then the hash changes and the build breaks. Does that clarify?
<quiliro>I am analysing ....the file you mention has sep 17 as date
<quiliro>yes. it clarifies! thank you :-)
<quiliro>but now i do not understand the guix part then.
<quiliro>let put it in words:
<nckx>civodul: Thanks.
<quiliro>I thought guix used a certain commit of every software and not changing versions. That is why it has a hash. ¿Am I wrong?
<nckx>Put on your flame-retardant pants!
<quiliro>I do not see where this is true: "[...] the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to."
<quiliro>I do not agree to that statement.
<nckx>quiliro: Linking to URLs like is fine because they are supposed to be finished, frozen in time. The person who packaged coin3D was presumably unaware that ‘4.0.0’ is still in the future, and that points to an unstable tarball that keeps changing.
<jmarciano>"Yet, we must also acknowledge that Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: the empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to." -- that is generalization and as such also not accurate. Immature people write generalizations. Responsible people use facts, and I think there is
<jmarciano>no fact supporting that nonsense.
<nckx>Pants: engaged.
<quiliro>nckx: I did not see your signature.
<nckx>I didn't check to see if it's there (I don't expect it to be), but I agree with the statement.
<jmarciano>I wish to see "Stallman’s behavior over the years" -- as facts.
<quiliro>nckx: so you must sign it if you agree...
<nckx>I must nothing :)
<jmarciano>As "over the years" I see that he has done all good deeds, many seminars, here are the facts:
<civodul>nckx: i would, but flame-retardant are toxic! :-)
<quiliro>nckx: I think that the people that sign that statement must link to proof to what the document says, as jmarciano said
<jmarciano>that I call "mutiny" without reason. You are asking people "sign if you agree" but not giving any facts, that is grouped dictatorship.
<civodul>hello jmarciano
<civodul>i hear your disagreement
<jmarciano>that is disgraceful what you are doing, on his domain.
<quiliro>nckx: sorry...i did not mean must...i mean to ask why or why not
<jmarciano>you are nuts and crazyy
<civodul>but please note that this is not the right place to have a debate about it
<nckx>quiliro: They are under no so obligation.
<rekado_>jmarciano: please refrain from name calling.
<civodul>jmarciano: also, this language is uncalled for and unwelcome here
<jmarciano>I don't care, I find you civodul crazy to sign that disgraceful zero-fact page without reconigzing the largest deeds
<jmarciano>I will not, just take me out, you are crazy idiots!
***ChanServ sets mode: +o civodul
***ChanServ sets mode: +o nckx
***jmarciano was kicked by civodul (Kicked by civodul)
<quiliro>I think people must support what they accuse others of doing.
<civodul>terrible when people can't disagree without insulting
<quiliro>They ore under such obligation
<quiliro>I do not like jmaciano's attitude. But neither do I agree with censorship....I will leave the room.
<civodul>quiliro: as you know, we have a code of conduct
<civodul>i have no problem with jmaciano expressing their disagreement
<civodul>but i do have a problem with code of conduct violations
<civodul>which is why i kicked them
<quiliro>a code is as good as its objective...i do not agree with with censorship
<rekado_>We do not want the project channels to be used for insults. This is not censorship.
<nckx>quiliro: Neither does civodul, I'm sure.
<quiliro>i think censorship is worse than violations to a code
<quiliro>kicking somebody out IS censorship
<rekado_>certainly not.
<quiliro>not lestting someone speak because it hurts you is censorship
<roptat>quiliro, as long as you're not the one being insulted ;)
<civodul>listen quiliro, we Guix maintainers are committed to keeping the Guix communication channels a "safe space"
<nckx>quiliro: If we were kicking out people who disagreed, that would be censorship. You're still here.
<civodul>quiliro: we work so that these channels are not the place where people go insult each other at will
<roptat>quiliro, you're expressing you're disagreement politely and nobody will kick you, btw :)
<quiliro>but if i do not agree with your rules you will kick me out because i will not follow them
<nckx>quiliro: That's not what censorship means. They were being needlessly agressive and insulting (their last message was them asking to be taken out, civodul obliged). Nobody will ever be kicked from #guix because they disagree with anyone.
<roptat>if you act against the rules, we will kick you
<quiliro>those rules were not made by me
<nckx>quiliro: That's a promise I'm sure all here are comfortable with.
<roptat>if you insult someone and we agree with you, we will kick you too
<brendyyn>How can i skip the hash check in a package definition? for testing purposes
<nckx>roptat: 😃
<rekado_>brendyyn: you can’t generally do that, but you can tell “guix build” to use a different tarball.
<civodul>brendyyn: you can't really do that, except perhaps with --with-branch, if applicable
<civodul>yeah, or --with-source
<roptat>brendyyn, --with-source does not check
<quiliro>it is better to treat the issue without commiting abuse on the abuser
<brendyyn>im using a git-reference
<civodul>then --with-branch should work, or --with-git-url
<quiliro>please invite jmaciano in again and try to convince him/her to avoid insulting, instead of kicking him/her out
<bandali>quiliro, surely we can’t expect to be the ones making the rules in whatever community we choose to participate in? also, i don’t think civodul kicking jmarciano is abuse
<nckx>quiliro: I disagree that banning someone for insulting contributors is abuse. AFAIK they were not banned (but I may well be mistaken).
<bandali>i’m sure they’d be welcome back here if they spoke politely without insulting others
<nckx>Of course.
<nckx>They are not banned.
<brendyyn>in code though, rather than the command line?
<quiliro>so if they conform to your rules, you will let them in again...sounds like all other governments
<nckx>quiliro: They are not banned.
<quiliro>then do not condition the kicking to controlling behavior
<nckx>If someone comes into your house and starts yelling insults at you, you are perfectly entitled to show them the door. civodul didn't even close it.
<rekado_>brendyyn: that won’t work, I’m afraid
<quiliro>let people do as they are free to ignore them
<quiliro>so this is your house? it is not mine?
<rekado_>quiliro: this would quickly let this place become an unpleasant channel. See the broken windows argument.
<quiliro>violence does not go down by escalating it
*quiliro will read
<nckx>quiliro: I didn't say that.
<quiliro>so we must repair the windows, not lock the window breakers
<rekado_>quiliro: please let it go. We won’t refrain from kicking people who have been warned and who make this place an unwelcoming environment by hurling insults.
<quiliro>kicking someone is violence, it is not an invitation
<bandali>but i think that’s exactly what civodul did: he deescalated the situation by temporary pointing that person at the door. the person can use this to take a moment and reflect
<bandali>and join back in if they decide to be respectful
<quiliro>i will not refrain from telling you about it
<rekado_>quiliro: it is not violence. We disagree.
<quiliro>disagreement is not kicking somebody out
<rekado_>quiliro: I think you’ve made your point. You don’t have to repeat it.
<quiliro>it is imposition
<nckx>‘warning: connection security to is disabled per current settings; communication is susceptible to eavesdropping and tampering’
<nckx>I've not seen that before.
<roptat>btw, I'm probably just uninformed, but I don't know of anything rms did that didn't contribute to GNU or free software in general... could someone hint me at such things?
<roptat>is this related to his recent resignations?
<Minall>Hello guix!
<nckx>quiliro: The word ‘kick’ is indeed a very unfortunate (and simply inaccurate) term. :-/
<rekado_>roptat: related? Yes. But consider it the final straw and not the ultimate reason why many of us felt a statement was necessary.
<nckx>The above message is for a https://bitbucket URL, by the way.
*nckx would glady co-sign the statement, but it predates me.
<civodul>so, are we merging core-updates?
<civodul>this has been one of my favorite topics lately :-)
<nckx>civodul: I think nobody disagrees & somebody just needs to do it (hintery hint).
<brendyyn>is there a package definition for building guile from git. i tried just changing the origin from guile-next but it fails,so i guess it needs to have some difference from using the tarball?
<quiliro>If someone enters your house and they use it for several years and take advantage of it, they should not kick you out of your own house and they should not kick out someone that defends you even if that person insults them....
<rekado_>civodul: I think we’re good to merge.
<rekado_>(famous last words)
<rekado_>brendyyn: I guess it’ll need to have its build system bootstrapped
<nckx>I can only say I run core-updates on 4 machines and nothing caught fire (maybe 't was the pants…)
<quiliro>They should value the good that you have given them and try to convince the insulting person to argue with better points.
<rekado_>nckx: I’m running core-updates on two machines. No fire-proof pants here, just drenched in baby puke, really.
<quiliro>instead of kicking both people out because the words they use make you feel bod about yourself
<rekado_>brendyyn: it could be enough to add the autotools packages
<nckx>quiliro: ‘Both’?
<quiliro>the owner ond the insulting defender
<quiliro>that sounded German
<civodul>rekado_, nckx, apteryx: i'll do another merge of master in core-updates, then
<rekado_>civodul: thanks!
<civodul>and how knows, maybe tonight we'll do the actual merge!
<rekado_>so exciting!
<civodul>it's been so exciting for so long! :-)
<nckx>It's not that insults make people feel bad about themselves (that implies there's something about themselves to feel bad about). It's that holding adults to a minimum adult standard of ‘don't hurl insults’ is not unreasonable. It's the lowest possible bar.
<quiliro>I think that it is very ungrateful to make that statement
<quiliro>and to kick someone out because of words
<rekado_>quiliro: please re-read the first paragraph of the statement wrt to being grateful.
<nckx>quiliro: I don't follow. Who else got removed from this channel?
<nckx>Or are you talking about rms? None of us removed rms, there's little point in arguing that…
<quiliro>The first paragraph is erased by the second....It is like saying he made so much good as bad
<quiliro>kicking stallman and kicking jmarciano
<quiliro>i feel it is very low
<quiliro>it is the ultimate form of insult
<quiliro>without even using bad words
<quiliro>i think you should at least re-fraze what you wrote
<rekado_>quiliro: the statement is out. It won’t be rephrased.
<nckx>quiliro: jmarciano was warned, and could have chosen to make the same point without insults (in fact it would have strengthened their case). Nobody here kicked Stallman.
<quiliro>that is too bad...someone should make a statement againt it
<quiliro>you are kicking out stallman!
<nckx>quiliro: The Web is full of those.
<quiliro>how can you betray your friend?
<quiliro>your mentor
<quiliro>your benefactor
<civodul>quiliro: we're calling for change, and that has nothing to do with kicking Stallman
<civodul>we do recognize that he's been our "mentor" as you write
<rekado_>quiliro: I urge you to reconsider your mental image of what this statement means.
*civodul pushes another merge to core-updates
<quiliro>rekado_: i am trying
<rekado_>this is very far from being “betrayal”, “kicking”, or “insulting”.
<brendyyn>isn't it just about him not having this leader position, its not like hes going to be kicked out of GNU entirely?
<quiliro>"Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project" can you ven think that is true?
<rekado_>quiliro: maybe give it some time and come back to it. It took a long time to arrive at this statement. I don’t expect that agreement will take any less time.
<quiliro>rekado_: perhaps it is best to do that
<rekado_>quiliro: it is not surprising that a person’s set of actions over a long life will have positive and negative results.
<rekado_>quiliro: Richard has done an enormous amount of good; this is undeniable in my opinion.
<quiliro>in the mean time, i will remove guix from all my machines
<nckx>quiliro: If you oppose censorship (as do I), consider that perhaps a) these opinions are as genuine and thought-out as your own (these are GNU maintainers) b) they have a right to publish it without being forced to rephrase it.
<roptat>quiliro, I found that: with a few links at the bottom to other stories
<roptat>I think it's related
<quiliro>i am not forcing anyone...i am retiring myself
<quiliro>the oposite of what you have done
<quiliro>thank you roptat ...will read
<nckx>quiliro: I haven't forced anyone to do anything, and I think you know that. Your reaction surprises & saddens me.
<quiliro>not you...the signers
<nckx>I see no force in their words at all.
<rekado_>all of those who signed (and many who didn’t) are very passionate about GNU. Retiring from GNU because we disagree with how it is governed or represented would be counterproductive.
<quiliro>seeing the result at is very forecful
<bavier>civodul, rekado_: I know the maintainers have regular meetings, are there additional planned now to discuss "organization of the project"?
<rekado_>FWIW here’s my personal statement from a few weeks ago:
<quiliro>I will not retire from gnu...just from signer's projects...and convince all my contacts too
<civodul>bavier: actually maintainers do not have regular meetings, which is probably unfortunate
<rekado_>quiliro: it is ironic and sad that your response to a call for a better GNU results in your sabotage of free software that embodies Richard’s ideals.
<quiliro>i do not use gnu because it is better or cheap...i use it to promote good deeds...
<civodul>bavier: there's a couple of private mailing lists where all maintainers are subscribed, and which is where discussion happens
<brendyyn>I see. the guile repo has a bootstrap directory and it tries to execute that..
<civodul>bavier: it's unfortunate that they're private, it's one of the things we failed to change
<rekado_>brendyyn: oh. That’s the gnu-build-system’s “bootstrap” phase trying to be smart…
<nckx>quiliro: That applies to everyone here. Guix is neither better nor cheap yet; everyone here is by definition an idealist.
<rekado_>it tries to call a “bootstrap” script if it exists.
<rekado_>(guess it should check that this is really a script)
<bavier>civodul: ah ok, that's just as good; I had thought I'd seen mention of maintainer's meetings at some of the GNU conferences
<rekado_>brendyyn: I know it’s not really helping you achieve your goal right now, but would you be willing to send a patch to the gnu-build-system some time later to add a check before executing a directory named “bootstap”?
<roptat>bavier, there's the annual GNU Hackers Metting
<rekado_>bavier: there’s a GNU Hacker’s Meeting, but it’s more like a show and tell
<roptat>unless that stopped
<bavier>got it :)
<brendyyn>ill have a look to see if i can do it
<quiliro>how can an idealist turn against their mentor...that is not so
<rekado_>roptat: no, still going; this year’s meeting took place just a few weeks ago, I think.
<bandali>we don’t have to agree with every single thing our mentor does/says
<rekado_>roptat: the next one is already being planned. I think Hamburg (Germany) might be the next location.
<bandali>(and i say that as someone who looks up to rms in many ways)
<quiliro>i think that Guix is the organizer of this turn against stallman
<roptat>then I might come next year :)
<quiliro>it is the publisher
<roptat>I thought it would be published on every signing project?
<nckx>quiliro: Exactly because ideas are greater (and must be) than one person. This is the whole point of the letter, and a feeling many (like me) share: software freedom is too important to be tied so closely tied to rms and his fallibility.
<rekado_>it’s relayed to
<rekado_>roptat: other projects are welcome to republish it, but I see little value in doing this, to be honest.
<civodul>had there been a central GNU location for that, we'd have used it
<civodul>but there's no such thing, apart from
<roptat>I don't know, it would have felt more right
<quiliro>I see this as a recollection of Guix to pull GNU maintainers aginst Richard
<roptat>but, it had to be published somewhere I guess
<civodul>roptat: note also that the signatories are signing individually, not on behalf of their project
<civodul>for instance, GCC has a Steering Committee (SC), and the SC is not signing as such
<rekado_>quiliro: I think you’re overestimating the amount of influence that Guix maintainers have within GNU ;)
<bandali>btw, what does rms think about all of this? he strikes me as a very logical person capable of self-reflection
<civodul>bandali: we let him know in advance that we were going to publish this
<bandali>i’d be interested in hearing/seeing him respond to others’ takes about his behviour
<roptat>civodul, yes and that's why publishing on one project's blog feels weird
<bandali>civodul, i see. did he mention any thoughts/reflections about it and/or about himself?
<roptat>if you're not signing on behalf of the Guix project, why publish it there?
<rekado_>bandali: almost all of the discussion between his resignation from the FSF presidency and the publication of this statement were on private GNU mailing lists :-/
*nckx agrees with that; didn't realise it would be a Guix-first thing, but then there is no neutral place I guess.
<nckx>☝ with roptat.
<civodul>roptat: yeah i hear you, that's why i wrote on guix-devel that we're somewhat abusing the blog, but again, i can't think of another place for that
<bandali>rekado_, right, which i find unfortunate. though i’m a gnu webmaster, i’m not currently on any of the maintainers-only lists to see what’s been going on
<nckx>Well, first as in only published on, being first would have been fine.
<rekado_>bandali: yeah, it’s a bit frustrating that so much of GNU discussions happen on private lists.
<civodul>bandali: if you go ahead and publish it right on, we can remove it from the Guix blog :-)
<bandali>rekado_, right
<civodul>people don't necessarily realize that GNU maintainers don't have direct access to
<nckx>Hah but serious.
<civodul>they can only write to
<bandali>civodul, haha i wonder if i could. maybe try asking webmasters@ as a whole?
<bandali>roptat, nckx, civodul, i wonder if personal sites/blog of the signing maintainers could be a somewhat better option ?
<civodul>bandali: well that was more of a joke, because i suspect not everyone would agree, and in particular rms would veto it
<civodul>bandali: re personal blogs, maybe
<civodul>in the end, we tried to make it clear the statement is not on behalf of GNU, or on behalf of GCC, or Guix, etc.
<roptat>sounds better than the current solution to me, but I understand the choice that was made
<quiliro>that is not true
<bandali>on a side note, i’ve been meaning to ask fsf sysadmins to setup a web server on fencepost or another machine where gnu people would have personal webspace
<quiliro>Joint statement on the GNU Project
<quiliro>We, the undersigned GNU maintainers and developers
<roptat>*on*, not *of*
<roptat>as in about, as I understand it
<nckx>quiliro: ‘on’ means ‘about’, is that unclear?
<civodul>"the undersigned maintainers" is meant to convey that a bunch of people, not projects, are signing
<quiliro>GNU maintainers and developers speak about GNU
<roptat>and " the undersigned GNU maintainers and developers" as in "some of the GNU maintainers and developers"
<nckx>quiliro: Yes, but not ‘in name of’.
<bandali>so that way ludo (or any other gnu maintainer) could have something like… to write their GNU-related thoughts on, rather than the project’s blog
<quiliro>it implies all maintainers and devs
<civodul>bandali: that would be nice to have, indeed
<quiliro>or at least a majority vote
<brendyyn>guix build: error: all build users are currently in use; consider creating additional users and adding them to the `guixbuild' group
<bandali>civodul, cool :) i’ll send the email about it soon then
<brendyyn>Interesting, i thought it would always wait for a slot?
<civodul>brendyyn: perhaps --max-jobs is higher than your number of users?
<quiliro>by placing the name of their projects implies they do it in representation of those
<civodul>it's their affiliation
<civodul>honestly, i think "we, the undersigned" is as clear as we can do
<roptat>quiliro, I think we're reading it differently because we're not native speakers...
<quiliro>so put GNU Guix dev, not GNU Guix
<civodul>well, if i were to write "quiliro (Ecuador)", that wouldn't imply you're the new Correa, would it? :-)
<nckx>I agree that ‘on’ is clear as day… for native speakers; ‘about’ might've been better.
<brendyyn>i created 10 users and set max-jobs to 10 in my os definition
<roptat>I agree with quiliro on that point, it really feels like you signed on behalf of the Guix project, especially when you specify that the SC of GCC doesn't sign
<bandali>tbh i read it a bit like that too
<bandali>whether or not that was the intention
<nckx>brendyyn: Maybe it's cores * jobs? It's happened to me, but rarely.
<civodul>hmm ok, that is surprising to me
<quiliro>stallman has allienated millions of users of free software by visiting them consttantly in their countries and giving activists and students gratis access to his conferences (including all genders recently discovered)
<brendyyn>nckx: what do you mean? is there a limit to that number too
<jmarciano>Turn on the "comments" on your disgraceful page as if it is "collective statement" then let people collectively COMMENT on such "blog page".
<nckx>brendyyn: I don't see how, but well, it shouldn't happen and it does, so *something*'s wrong 🙂
<bandali>jmarciano, keep it respectful, please
<civodul>jmarciano: there's no comment mechanism there, but GNU hackers will undoubtedly discuss it on the private maintainer list
<jmarciano>I keep it just by the tone of that same page.
<jmarciano>Those are "your hackers" not "GNU hackers".
<nckx>jmarciano: Welcome back. Collective means ‘we, the undersigned, think…’, not ‘public forum’.
<jmarciano>To make it "collective" you should not even publish such page without having commenting option. Don't tell me you really have "impossibility" of providing comments.
<jmarciano>No, it is not "we undersigned" it is just few of "you" who incited more of others to undersign that defamation.
<nckx>jmarciano: We don't, really, but that doesn't matter. Comments are not required to be hosted by Guix.
<quiliro>that page is full of unproved statements about Richard if he was someone that hurt the movement he created
<jmarciano>Well guix is also not required to be hosted by GNU. Don't be hypocrite.
<civodul>quiliro: please understand that maintainers may have a different perspective
<brendyyn>andy has comments on his blog and most of them are spam. its not so simple to just add comments
<jmarciano>nckx: please do not use "we" when speaking for yourself, not asking other people to represent them.
<civodul>the people signing the statement typically have many years of experience as GNU maintainers
<nckx>jmarciano: No, I'm not talking about myself.
<jmarciano>brendyyn: you are hacker, that undermines your skills. Comments are easily to be placed and easy to moderate when you really think that is necessary.
<nckx>I'm saying that ‘we’, as a project, do not have a Web site set-up that can support comments without serious hacking.
<jmarciano>nckx: who is "we"? Which project?
<civodul>jmarciano: please refrain from being aggressive
<civodul>we understand you strongly disagree
<jmarciano>I think some software like Discourse exists. But lack of comments is showing lack of "collective" thinking. It is group of dictators.
<nckx>Or purposely obtuse.
<jmarciano>How I am aggressive? By expressing my opinion?
<quiliro>I moderate about 50 mailing lists....those receive a lot of is not that hard to moderate comments on a web page
<roptat>jmarciano, the 12 people who signed at the bottom of the post
<civodul>but please express that in a way that allows for constructive discussion
<jmarciano>civodul: "we" is who?
<roptat>well, 18
<jmarciano>roptat: is that answer to question to nckx?
<roptat>jmarciano, no to yours, "we" is in the 18 people who signed the post
<civodul>jmarciano: the statement is signed by 18 individuals, that is the "we" at the beginning
<jmarciano>There are millions of idiots on this world. They sign all kinds of nonsense documents.
<civodul>jmarciano: again, watch your language
<jmarciano>so you claim to have their representation automatically to speak for them even on this chat?
<jmarciano>ok let me calm down
<civodul>thank you
<jmarciano>because you really really upset me.
<civodul>let me remind you of
<quiliro>i will write an email right now about this statement urging people to make forks
<jmarciano>that is something you had to remind yourself when publishing that page in first place, and that is why I am upset.
<roptat>jmarciano, the post only represents the people who signed, who happen to be GNU maintainers and developers
<civodul>jmarciano: we understand you're upset, and you're welcome to discuss it here when you feel less nervous
<jmarciano>so civodul, you cannot close me on that page, as I see skyscraper high hipocrisy!
<civodul>please please, jmarciano
<jmarciano>so tell me, why are you harassing Stallman?
<jmarciano>which is clearly against your own policies.
<civodul>i disagree that this is harassment
<quiliro>why is expressing feelings against the code of conduct? do feelings have to be soft in order to be expressed?
<civodul>and it's not me personally, as you know
<nckx>jmarciano: Please stop the loaded questions that have no basis in fact. Nobody is harrassing Stallman that I know of (and I'd ask them nicely to stop ;-)
<civodul>quiliro: expressing feelings is fine; i only wanted to remind jmarciano of the rules that apply here
<quiliro>i do not think it is harrasment against stallman but rather an attack
<civodul>and we Guix maintainers will stick to them
<jmarciano>This is pure harassment and defamation: illegal in many countries.
<quiliro>i would even have considered signing suck a pamphlet if it even had some proof
<jmarciano>civodul: spare me of "we" as you do not even know what you are doing now, speaking for other people without having their authority to do so.
<quiliro>it is discrediting Richard and it shows no proof
<jmarciano>so how about answering my question: WHY?
<civodul>jmarciano: please stop talking like this, alright?
<civodul>why what?
<civodul>what that statement?
<jmarciano>"Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project" -- WHICH specific behavior undermined core value of GNU project?
<quiliro>civodul: how is "like this"?
<jmarciano>civodul: you are unable to understand simple question and are asking me to stop talking? Dictator.
<quiliro>jmarciano: do not call him a dictator please...
<nckx>jmarciano: Please stop insulting people.
<nckx>You've been asked again and again.
<jmarciano>So you 18 people insulta Stallman, but you are not ready to receive insults?
<civodul>you've probably seen a number of events, like the "glibc abort joke" episode, the latest episode with MIT, and more
<jmarciano>"Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of
<jmarciano> the GNU project" -- WHICH specific behavior undermined core value
<jmarciano> of GNU project?
<civodul>if you were on GNU maintainer mailing lists, you would have seen more
<nckx>jmarciano: Nobody has insulted Stallman.
<jmarciano>civodul: I asked you, give me specific answer. Not clue. Give me ONE FACT.
<civodul>there were other events at GUADEC, in LibrePlanet, etc.
<civodul>but really, i don't want to rehash all that
<civodul>i think people who've been around long enough are aware of that
<jmarciano>stick to just one. Not two, not "many". Give me one fact that I can see.
<quiliro>i agree that nobody has insulted stallman...they have just betrayed him
<nckx>Hell, even I am.
<jmarciano>For example how did "glibc abort joke" undermine core value of the GNU project?
<civodul>jmarciano: i gave you several examples
<jmarciano>No, you did not. Show me how did glibc abort joke undermined core value of GNU project?
<civodul>jmarciano: the "glibc abort joke" undermined GNU's core values because it scared people away from GNU
<jmarciano>Which people?
<civodul>like you i care about GNU, and i think we must work to reach out to more people
<nckx>jmarciano: You may certainly ask, but where you seem to be mistaken is that nobody is obligated to give you ‘evidence’.
<jmarciano>Please you do not need to teach me about your intentions as you have already stated it on 7th.
<nckx>This is all public knowledge.
<jmarciano>but please stick to ONE FACT. Which people were scared of GNU Project?
<civodul>jmarciano: you want names or?...
<roptat>jmarciano, for a specific example
<roptat>sorry about the twitter link ;)
<jmarciano>absolutely, as if somebody is "scared" that does not undermine core value of GNU project. So who was scared that being scared undermined core value of the GNU project?=
<jmarciano>I don't mind the link, but I do not see on link that it "undermined core value of GNU project".
<nckx>jmarciano: You got your ‘one fact’.
<quiliro>This undermines the GNU project?: "Future Change Warning: Proposed Federal censorship regulations may prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an acceptable way of terminating a program."
<roptat>lots of women, when the core values are to empower *everyone*
<roptat>at least, from what I've starting reading
<nckx>quiliro: Exactly.
<jmarciano>Can I get answer? Just write to even later, if anybody of you remembers at least ONE FACT that clearly shows how "Stallman's behavior over years undermined core values of GNU project".
<nckx>jmarciano: You have been linked to many. A simple Web search will find more.
<jmarciano>I am not using my words, I am using expression found on
<civodul>jmarciano: we answered, and perhaps you disagree, or perhaps you'd like to rehash the events we're referring to
<civodul>but let's not do that, not on this channel
<jmarciano>nkcx: give me one fact. Don't say simple search, I did not find how "Stallman's behavior over yearsundermined core values of GNU project" -- quite contrary I found everything else. So I am genuinely trying to understand here. And you are making it hard.
<civodul>on the glibc thing alone, there's at least one LWN article and very long public threads
<nckx>##rms exists, for those interested. ;-)
<civodul>you can reread them
<nckx>jmarciano: No? I am not your search engine.
<civodul>jmarciano: again, it's fine to disagree with what's written there, but please stop asking us to try and convince you
<nckx>You don't address people with ‘Give me x’ demands.
<jmarciano>civodul: so is that ALL what you had to say about the facts that show how "Stallman's behavior over yearsundermined core values of GNU project" -- basically the answer is "glibc abort joke" that scared many people away from GNU project, but without knowing the number of people and without knowing how them being scared undermined core values of GNU project? Is that the fact that you state?
<civodul>that's again not the tone we want to see on this channel
<civodul>jmarciano: the answer is not "glibc abort joke", read again what i wrote
<civodul>and please, stop repeating the same thing
<quiliro>i just read the twitter post....shee says that richard was looking at her boobs
<civodul>also, even if you disagree, please remember that everyone who signed has a long history with GNU and as maintainers
<jmarciano>Look people I am not sure what you are doing. I am genuinely looking for the answer ont that statement, ONE FACT, just one, that will clearly show how "Stallman's behavior over years undermined core values of GNU project". I would like to go back and kindly ask, but I cannot. May I get the answer?
<superkuh>You guys are actually buying into this media circus?
<jmarciano>How looking at boobs is undermining core values of GNU project?
<quiliro>that really undermines the GNU if no person has looked at anybody's body before
***jmarciano was kicked by civodul (Kicked by civodul)
<civodul>superkuh: no, we're not
<superkuh>Then you might want to edit that "Joint statement on the GNU Project"
<quiliro>why was he kicked now????
<nckx>superkuh: Welcome. Please be respectful. I can't speak for others, but I've purposefully avoided the media circus.
<superkuh>Avoided... well Guix isn't avoiding it. It's stirring it up and adding new feces.
<superkuh>Anyway, you've got my two cents. Destroy yourselves if you wish.
<nckx>This is going to be a long day.
<bavier>uff da
<quiliro>civodul: please cite the reasen jmarciano was kicked out...
<jmarciano>you disgrace you kicked me out again, what is it that is making you nervous? Fucking idiot Ludovic!
<bandali>stop this jmarciano
<jmarciano><jmarciano> There is no famous person in the world, including Ghandi, and
<jmarciano> Mother Theresa, that was not attacked, defamed, harassed or even
<jmarciano> killed by their own comrades, friends, or clients. Like Houdini
<jmarciano> died because he accepted to get kicked in his stomach, and student
<jmarciano> was too fast to kick him, so good entertainer died. That still
<jmarciano> does not say however, how "Stallman's behavior over years
<jmarciano> undermined core values of GNU project" -- because for me the
<jmarciano> [18:01]
<jmarciano>No target
<jmarciano><jmarciano> core values are four software freedoms and creation of fully free
<nckx>jmarciano: Please stop this behaviour ☹
<jmarciano> software. So I am not getting it and looking for answer. Contact
***jmarciano was kicked by nckx (jmarciano)
<nckx>That includes /msgs, yes.
***nckx sets mode: +b jmarciano!*@*
<quiliro>nckx: you too!
<quiliro>nckx: i did not think that of you
<quiliro>it is so lame
<quiliro>am i going to be kicked out too because i think it is lame?
<rekado_>quiliro: I don’t see you hurling insults, so the answer is no.
<nckx>quiliro: No? jmarciano was flooding the channel with automated paste spam, that's why I kicked them.
<nckx>They also bothered me over /MSG but that alone was not enough.
<rekado_>quiliro: I would request from you to help deescalate the situation here, though.
<quiliro>but civodul kicked him without reason before that
<nckx>quiliro: You'll see that I've done this 2/3 times in the past, when people paste a whole file into #guix.
<rekado_>quiliro: that is not correct. Please discuss the moral implications of kicking someone from #guix for repeatedly harassing people here elesewhere.
<quiliro>nckx: flooding i think is a good reason
***nckx sets mode: -b jmarciano!*@*
<nckx>I'll give them another chance as long as they don't flood or msg me.
<rekado_>quiliro: please do your part to keep the discussions here civil and on-topic.
*rekado_ leaves to buy groceries
<quiliro>nckx: regarding /msg are free to ignore...regarding can automatically confirue that...¿no?
<quiliro>nckx: "another chance" sounds overpowering
<nckx>quiliro: I can configure a bot to kick them (I really don't know how, and IRC bots are horrible) or I can do it myself. I don't really see the difference.
<quiliro>ok...but /ignore is easy
<quiliro>the first thing to de-escalate the situation is to avoid censorship (or as you might want to call it; moderation)
<nckx>quiliro: The whole point of a moderated channel is that you can't /ignore people you'd like to. I think Freenode even frowns upon it, but whatever. I'd like to sometimes, but no, I have to parse everything ;-)
<bandali>quiliro, we all did try to calm them/things down though, that was a last resort
<brendyyn>Is there any difference between (and (file-exists? file) (not (file-is-directory? file)), AND simply (not (file-is-directory? file)) ?
<jmarciano>sorry I did not "flood" I have sent one line.
<jmarciano>Maybe your software is breaking one line into multiple lines, I do not know.
<quiliro>nckx: you can ignore a buffer from that person...
<nckx>quiliro: It's not censorship, because it has nothing to do with their opinion. Only their behaviour. You disagree, you're here, you're about as far from moderation as can be.
<jmarciano>consider if your "joint statements" are doing more harm than good
<bandali>jmarciano, fwiw, i received your message in ERC as multiple lines
<jmarciano>bandali: I use jabber in Emacs, and I see long lines just as mine, and not as multiple lines. Using M-x irc
<jmarciano>sorry, erc
<quiliro>jmarciano: i got that separated into several lines too
<quiliro>i sue erc too
<bandali>ha… anyhow, the effect for multiple people seems to have been flodding
<nckx>jmarciano: They were *sent* as multiple lines; your client may have split them but you're still responsible for what you send.
<bandali>i guess that happens with overly long messages
<nckx>jmarciano: I've kicked people before for accidental flooding (which I have no reason to believe yours wasn't at this point), it's really not a moral judgement. It's a quick technical fix.
<quiliro>"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by a government,[5] private institutions, and corporations."
<jmarciano>well because that was second time that I tried to put it, after copy, it got into multiple lines. But first time it was not possible to send it. Because civodul kicked me out.
<jmarciano>how about removing that disgraceful statement that is contrary to good behavior policy of Guix?
<nckx>jmarciano: Meditate on why that was and try not to do it again.
<nckx>No, not like that.
<jmarciano>nckx: second time it was multiple lines. First time it was not!
<jmarciano>but first time you could not see it
<quiliro>the second time civodul kicked jmarciano out was unjustified
<jmarciano>I said why it was. Civodul kicked me out. So I have copied it and pasted it. Then you kicked me out.
<civodul>jmarciano: can we have this discussion on #gnu?
<civodul>i've just joined there
<nckx>jmarciano: I can only see what I see, I hope we can agree on at least that.
<jmarciano>But that is all not the point. The point is generalization versus specific facts, which I did not get not even one, and I truly do not understand, and truly searching for answer. One of the 18 judas will know it.
<quiliro>not even curse words
<jmarciano>I promise not to use too bad curse words.
<nckx>jmarciano: Please don't hurl insults.
<nckx>Calling people you disagree with ‘Judas’ qualifies as that, you don't have to say ‘fuck’ or ‘fanny’, we're not 5.
<jmarciano>instead of teaching me the bad guy, good behavior, how about you put your statements on GNU.ORG domain in accordance with GUIX's own Code of Conduct?
<quiliro>i would agree to have this discussion on #gnu if you will not use it to avoid the discussion
<nckx>jmarciano: What do you mean?
<civodul>jmarciano: we'd love to, but we don't have access to
<jmarciano>Sorry what is "fanny" I never used it.
<civodul>anyhow, let's continue on #gnu, ok?
<jmarciano>just give me one fact.
<nckx>Never mind, irrelevant, I'm sorry.
<jmarciano>civodul: sorry, do you ask me?
<jmarciano>look, all I wish is to get one fact. Is that possible?
<civodul>stop repeating that, we already answered
<jmarciano>now you command me?
<nckx>jmarciano: Yes, it's unpleasant, isn't it? So please, stop doing so yourself.
<jmarciano>No, it was not answered. If I ask you where the accident happened, you cannot say "in the city", so you should be specific.
<jmarciano>Alright, so shall I stop talking here?
<civodul>i did my best to answer, please let's continue on #gnu if that's not enough
<civodul>you'll hopefully also get the perspective of other GNU hackers, there
<jmarciano>No, I will continue by bashing Guix down and disadvise people to associate with immature idiots. Is that fine?
<brendyyn>if file-exists? comes from boot-9, which also has a file-is-directory?, why does guix define a file-is-directory? in union.scm?
<nckx>jmarciano: Sounds like a plan if you've been repeatedly invited to #gnu.
<jmarciano>I said it will not be too bad.
***jmarciano was kicked by civodul (Kicked by civodul)
***nckx sets mode: +b jmarciano!*@*
<civodul>brendyyn: oh?
<civodul>yes, a mistake i guess!
<civodul>well we can certainly probably remove the duplicate
<brendyyn>ok i can send a patch
<civodul>we'd have to check if the one from boot-9 handles dangling symlinks correctly
<brendyyn>it looks quite different but i dont know the answer to that
<brendyyn>what is the correct way? in can test it
<civodul>brendyyn: i think the one from boot-9 is not good because it does: (eq? (stat:type (stat str)) 'directory)
<civodul>so if STR is dangling, you can a 'system-error exception
<brendyyn>Should guile's one its self be changed?
<civodul>whereas the one in union.scm simply returns #f in that case
<civodul>brendyyn: probably, yes
***nckx sets mode: +q $~a
***nckx changes topic to 'GNU Guix | 1.0.1 is out! get it at | your nick must be registered to talk | videos: | bugs and patches: | paste: | Guix in high-performance computing: | This channel is logged:'
<quiliro>Why did you kick jmarciano AGAIN?
<quiliro>because of the word idiots?
<bavier>but communication is also about more than individual words
<janneke>it is about maintaining a safe space
<quiliro>well i agree with him...will you kick me out for not saying that word but thinking it?
<quiliro>how safe can censorship be?
<civodul>no quiliro, as i'm sure you understand
<civodul>we're talking about a set of rules embodied at
<civodul>none of these rules prevent us from discussing
<civodul>but they do prevent us from making this place unpleasant
<quiliro>communication is about understanding feelings instead of avoiding them with censorship...that will bring real safe places
<quiliro>it is really unpleasant to see or worse suffer from censorship
<quiliro>you cannot deny it is in fact censoring
<quiliro>even wikipedia knows it
<quiliro>even with its partiality
<rushsteve1>Would there be any interest in a Guix importer for Arch PKGBUILD's?
<rushsteve1>This was brought up on the subreddit a little while back and I've been thinking about it.
<bavier>rushsteve1: omg, I started working on one a while back
<bavier>rushsteve1: works pretty well, actually
<quiliro>since none of the proponents of the statement are there... i am bringing the discussion about Richard back here
<janneke>hey dustyweb!
<rushsteve1>bavier: Really? Do you intend to contribute it? Because I'd find it very useful.
<dustyweb>hi janneke :)
<bavier>rushsteve1: yes, the intent was to eventually make it worthy of contribution
<bavier>i'm not entirely happy with the implementation at this point, but the results are promising
<quiliro>i suggest not to contribute to guix
<bavier>I think I was able to get 'guix refresh --list-updaters' up to about 95% coverage
<rushsteve1>bavier does your implementation support recursively importing PKGBUILDS?
<rushsteve1>That is promising results
<quiliro>it might censor you or betray you
<bavier>rushsteve1: no, and several other PKGBUILD syntax things are not yet handled properly
<bavier>I was hoping to maybe make use of guile's peg module to make a proper parser for the PKGBUILD files
<rushsteve1>bavier hmm... well if there is anything I can do to help lmk. I'm admittedly a novice a scheme and just getting into Guix development.
<rushsteve1>But I have to say, the idea of possibly offering the entire Arch repos as a Guix channel is *very* intriguing.
<rushsteve1>(a third-party channel of course)
<bavier>importing will probably be more difficult, so I started with an "updater"
<rushsteve1>What about importing is specifically difficult? I haven't looked at the importer code very closely.
<rushsteve1>Oh. I guess the matrix bridge was down and just came back?
<zacts>is 'idiot' truly not allowed here?
<nckx>zacts: Depends.
<nckx>Just don't be an idiot about it.
<bavier>rushsteve1: well, maybe once I've got a proper parser going the "import" part won't be too difficult
<nckx>rushsteve1: It's difficult in that you're getting data from very different kinds of sources, each upstream does things very differently (even the notion of ‘packages’, or ‘names’, or ‘what is a version’). You're parsing stuff very inexactly, with *a lot* of corner cases.
<bavier>names are hard
<nckx>It's not ‘quantum physics’ difficult, it's ‘shave all these yaks with a spoon’ difficult.
<nckx>Well, maybe a bit more fun.
<nckx>rushsteve1: I see now you're talking about PKGBUILDS (I just got back), the problem is that those (like ebuilds) are written in a Turing-complete language and the only way to parse them is to run code and oh god the edge cases.
<bavier>nckx: ;)
<bavier>idk that the parsing itself requires running code, but an importer would certainly need to evaluate things before getting at what it needs
<nckx>bavier: That's probably completely correct, you CS word knower person you. ‘Evaluating’ it is! 🙂
<bavier>nckx: I meant to say congrats on your maintainership :)
<nckx>bavier: Yaay, and what a wonderful week to start!
<nckx>(Thank you very much.)
<rushsteve1>Oh god PKGBUILDS are Turing complete? I thought they were just a declarative config... that does make things much more complicated.
<nckx>rushsteve1: Well, the language is. Don't quote me on Arch stuff! It *used* to be the only (official) way to evaluate them. Maybe that's changed. That would be great.
<nckx>If that doesn't just spawn a shell, looking good.
<roptat>aren't PKGBUILDS from Arch just shell scripts?
<quiliro> proof of the accusations made on Richard ...seems like NSA tactics are working
<quiliro>they are destroying our union
<nckx>quiliro: Please don't mention my employer in a negative light.
<nckx>roptat: Yes.
<nckx>You say ‘just’ like that is a good word 😛
<quiliro>thank you very much for your collaboration with them
<roptat>I meant simply
<roptat>I guess it's time for me to learn English properly :p
<nckx>roptat: Didn't mean anything by it, just made me smile.
<quiliro>nckx: NSA is your employer? are you joking?
<roptat>quiliro, probably ^^
<roptat>hm... probably joking, I mean
<bavier>perfect use for gash then :)
<nckx>I'm just sayin': the Stallman thing, my appointment as a maintainer…
<nckx>(No need to thank me, they pay me enough.)
<quiliro>please do not joke about that
<quiliro>being in jail for my friend ola bini was very bad and it is related to the NSA
<quiliro>persecution of julian assange
<quiliro>but i think that this RMS issue could be engineered by them...they are contacting feminists
<quiliro>and convincing them to attack us
<quiliro>as with Julian's case
<madage>I believe that for this many core gnus to come out on a joint formal statement, something has to be off... but where are those gpg signatures on the statement?
<madage>or are they important only for verifying binaries?
<madage>also: I think a more verbose wording on the bad behaviour of stallman would be nice not only to him, but to the people who were offended and to the broader community
<madage>so not only he, but we as a global collective can learn on what is not acceptable
<madage>and eventualy debate those rules if we don't agree with them
<parsley-dev>lol are people really still defending RMS
<madage>parsley-dev: well, I'm not
<madage>he didn't ask me and I don't think he realy needs it
<parsley-dev>just read the medium piece, there's zero ambiguity
<madage>the statement does not mention any medium piece
<madage>that would be an improvement, but I don't think there is a need to enumerate... we're not talking about a trial
<parsley-dev>sorry, I see what you're saying, I was more responding to quiliro
<madage>I'm more inclined to think on something as saying: he offended values a, b and c which are crucial to the gnu project goal
<parsley-dev>I don't know that that's necessary so much as making it clear he will never be the mouthpiece of anything
<madage>well he already has
<madage>but that could all be erased, since it's not on youtube
<nckx>madage: I've been staring at ‘could all be erased, since it's not on youtube’ a while. I'm curious what you mean by that 🙂
<nckx>(Without the ‘not’ I'd understand, even as hyperbole.)
<madage>It was a joke on the possibility of re-writing history, enhanced by our reliance on digital means
<madage>saying he will not be something which he already has been over the years is pure denialism
<nckx>I don't see the contradiction.
<madage>that's not the point I was trying to make anyway
<nckx>OK. 🙂
<madage>well, do you want me to try and explain? Is it important to what has been discussed?
<nckx>I was just curious about what I thought was a YouTube vs. other sites comment anyway, but I guess you meant YouTube vs. nowhere.
<nckx>madage: …no?
<nckx>Sorry for asking…
<madage>oh that's because there is an understanding that thing that go to google servers will remain there for eternity
<madage>I'm starting to fell bad about that failed attempt at a joke
<nckx>madage: That wasn't my intention at all. Sorry.
<nckx>(I was going to link to the ‘Google graveyard’ but there seems to be more than one now, and I don't want to link to a dodgy one.)
<janneke>madage: no need to feel bad, but jokes are tricky...i took your statement to mean: big money need only yell dmca, and google will take any truth that needs to be heard, down
<nckx>☝ same, but the ‘not’ threw me. That's all.
<nckx>I'm sure NSA will keep a back-up.
<madage>oh.. that'd be an even better joke, janneke .. except it maybe true?!
<janneke>madage: sadly, that is no joke
<nckx>It's not even hypothetical.
<quiliro>I think that removing Stallman from GNu would hurt the system
<madage>that's highly hypothetical quiliro
<quiliro>well, it hurt Guix...I am leaving...that is not hypothetical
<madage>or rather, the assumption that maintaining his leadership won't hurt harder
<quiliro>unless of course, Guix removes or modifies that statement
<madage>we should stand for free software, not for free stallman
<quiliro>and the maintainers of Guix make it clear it is not Guix's position
<quiliro>what is so funny?
<nckx>quiliro: ‘Free Stallman’. All Guix maintainers were in the loop, so I don't understand what you mean by ‘not Guix's position’.
<coldpress>i'm curious, am I'm sorry if I don't read the maliing lists, but why does Guix choose to publish this statement in the current state of the news?
<janneke>quiliro: what makes you think that someone would want RMS to leave GNU?
<coldpress>given that RMS has always acted like this, what prompted Guix to do something about it now instead of earlier?
<quiliro>janneke: as GNU leader
<nckx>coldpress: FWIW, I can't answer, but I agree.
<quiliro>i cannot believe those people signed that statement
<janneke>quiliro: that is something else altogether
<quiliro>nckx: you mean every single guix member agrees with that statement?
<nckx>That said, this has been simmering for years, the sentiments expressed are absolutely not in response to the latest incident.
<janneke>i fear you are misreading the statement
<nckx>quiliro: Do you see the list of names under that statement?
<quiliro>or is it that you imply that it is a dictatorship of the devs?
<nckx>quiliro: This is the first time I hear that every user of software or even contributor of patches must agree to every statement made by the project lead. I think you'll find it false.
<quiliro>nckx: a list of names that do not say they are one of the maintainers but imply the whole project it mentions has voted on that position
<quiliro>nckx: me too
<quiliro>so they should not represent everyone here
<nckx>Are you saying every user, patch contributor, IRC user, … should have been asked to take a vote on the matter?
*rekado_ is back
*rekado_ reads the backlog
<nckx>I'm trying to understand how you think this is representing you, specifically.
<nckx>rekado_: Noooo
*rekado_ shakes head
<quiliro>I think it would have been best...but if not, at least do not make me sound as I support that statement because i supported guix
<roptat>rekado_, my overdrive is back online!
<rekado_>quiliro: please take this discussion to #gnu. I also find it pretty mean that you’d tell other people here on this channel not to contribute to Guix.
<quiliro>if it says guix people would look at me locally
<rekado_>quiliro: the statement does not carry your name.
<rekado_>please take this elsewhere
<roptat>rekado_, the IP changed though, so you'll have to ask the firewall people :)
<quiliro>this is not a gnu issue right now, it is a guix issue
<quiliro>why is it mean as telling GNU people to kick out Stallman
<nckx>quiliro: You know (I hope you do) that I appreciate your presence here and I've always enjoyed helping & just talking to you. But I can't understand why you think people will think the Guix project speaks for you, or why the maintainers should have your blessing in everything they publish on
<nckx>I'm genuinely confused.
<rekado_>quiliro: it’s a GNU issue, because a) the statement is about GNU b) the signatories are from a large number of GNU packages and c) Guix is part of GNU.
<rekado_>roptat: oh… the firewall people…
<rekado_>roptat: I wished we could just tell them to keep SSH open.
<nckx>quiliro: rekado_'s right; it's not a Guix statement, it's a GNU statement. There are many other projects on that list.
<roptat>rekado_, actually I spoke too soon, I have no idea what's in my walls, but it's interfering with Linux's ability to detect the ethernet cable...
<nckx>rekado_, roptat: Can't they do domains now?
<quiliro>rekado_: it is a guix issue becase you and civodul do not sign as Guix say just guix)
<quiliro>nckx: no one else advocates for Guix localy....people think that everything guix does i agree with ...that is difficult to change
<rekado_>quiliro: I’m reaching the end of my capacity for frustration in my communications with you. It seems that no matter what I say you won’t be satisfied. I can live with this.
<nckx>quiliro: Now apply that last statement to rms. This is the exact problem.
<rekado_>quiliro: perhaps you see now that we are in a similar situation wrt to Richard stallman.
<rekado_>nckx beat me to it
<quiliro>rekado_: well i will not stop listening to you unless have nothing to say
<bavier>it seems there's confusion that the maintainer's signatures were as representative's for the repsective projects; but it's been clarified several times that this is not the case.
<roptat>rekado_, would you consider changing the phrasing to "name of person (GNU something maintainer)"? although I understand that it doesn't mean the Guix project, it felt like this on first read
<rekado_>nckx, roptat they said they can and I asked them to do just that, but our experience has shown that it’s not working.
*nckx for once. Yay 5GHz wifies.
<quiliro>so you mean Richard was firm in his position and that is why you made that statement?
<nckx>rekado_: Oh. Pity. Does that mean the Russians are on borrowed (IP) time? :-/
<quiliro>bavier...some gnu maintainers and devs would be the better wording
<nckx>quiliro: *all*
<nckx>and some devs.
<quiliro>all maintainers! no i do not think there are 18 packages
<rekado_>nckx: yes.
<quiliro>in GNU
<nckx>quiliro: Sorry, it was unclear that you didn't meat ‘some [Guix] maintainers’. Never mind.
<nckx>Eh, mean.
<nckx>Please don't meat us.
<janneke>quiliro: please take a breath, and re-read the statement. it is very clear. if someone wanted, it could be misunderstood in many ways.
<quiliro>I would not leave Guix if i could place a counterstatement on the Guix blog with equal right to do so.
<roptat>rekado_, so I found out that a switch fixed the problem, but I need one for myself, so I ordered a new one, I'll receive it next week
<quiliro>otherwise, i would be represented by something i oppose
<rekado_>quiliro: what appears on the Guix blog is the decision of the blog volunteers / the maintainer collective.
<rekado_>quiliro: you are free to post a statement to your very own blog or microblogging thing.
<quiliro>so i advocate for guix, but it does not represent me?
<rekado_>quiliro: it’s not really on topic for this channel to discuss how you would like to present your disagreement with Guix maintainer decisions.
<quiliro>of course it are just trying to ban me
<rekado_>I’m very disappointed that you have this hostile attitude after all our discussions in the past.
<rekado_>I’ll take some time off now. I’m disappointed.
<quiliro>i am just asking for equal rights
<quiliro>is that too much to ask for?
<nckx>quiliro: Please don't say things that are just not true :-/ You are quite the opposite of banned. You are very welcome.
<quiliro>saying i am off topic is a preamble to censorship
<nckx>People are spending energy and time talking to you. Trying to address your points (imperfectly as humans do). It's really not fair.
<quiliro>i am glad that is not the case if you say so
<quiliro>what is not fair is to have this inequality of rights
<nckx>quiliro: I have to take a short break too (believe it or not, I have a life outside of #guix :), but AFAIK nobody's ignoring you.
<quiliro>i think that people are talking to me because i am on the channel, not because they want me here
*kmicu is checking why today’s #guix backlog is soo long.
<nckx>quiliro: Considering *who's* talking to you (not random users who happen to be here) that is also not fair and I think you know it.
<nckx>I hope so.
*nckx → AFK now.
<quiliro>it is a difficult situation...but the salution is not banning people because they are angry or to reject the participation of someone that has contributed for years
*kmicu sees that someone posted their favorite folks on Guix blog ヽ(*^▽^)/
<quiliro>kmicu: i think that the space should not be used for bashing is counterproductive to GNU and to Guix and most of all it is lame
<quiliro>it is a time to give Richard all our support with the topics we agree with and recognize that we have disagreements too
<quiliro>and if we cannot agree on that, at least to let the people who do support him, have a change to express on it on the same space
<quiliro>if i belong here, i think that is the least i deserve
<janneke>quiliro: please do not keep echoing misinterpretations of the statement
<quiliro>janneke: it is not a misinterpretation, it is my interpretation
<quiliro>i could say it is a misrepresentation too
<coldpress>janneke: maybe explain why you think those are misinterpretations?
<quiliro>I say that the statement is a defamation because it gives no proof and the proof presented in this chatroom has been very partial.
<janneke>the statement is about recognizing that we are in debt to rms, acknowlegding his great vision and work
<quiliro>that first part does not worry me
<janneke>and about building a better, stronger, healthier GNU organisation
<kmicu>quiliro: please, keep in mind that lot of folks here joined Guix because it has strong and enforced Code of Conduct. RMS ≠ GNU.
<janneke>it is healthier for GNU, for Guix and for RMS when not everything he says reflects directly on GNU and on us, maintainers
<quiliro>If you would not like to hurt GNU, you would have asked Richard to do it himself and you would have accepted if he did not agree with you
<janneke>quiliro: what on earth makes you think that those people that signed the statement haven't done so?
<quiliro>kmicu: i did not join guix because of the CoC but despite it
<quiliro>because speaking badly about stallman hurt GNU...dirty clothes must be washed inhouse
<janneke>quiliro: you assume too much (or too little), really
<janneke>quiliro: but please take this to #gnu
<kmicu>RMS unnecesserily creates those kerfuffles. He is not fit to lead anymore and creates more harm than good nowadays. Too easily gives ammo to GNU/FSF opponents. And lost a lot of FSF money.
<quiliro>The father of the Free Software movement founded GNU too. If he is bad people will consider the 3 of them bad
<quiliro>he has been like that since the start...not now
<kmicu>Losing FSF money? Not really.
<janneke>kmicu: please take this to #gnu
<quiliro>how much money has the fsf lost from the start of the kerfuffles till now?
<kmicu>quiliro: we should move this to #gnu really or on FSF forum. What I am saying is already described there.
<kmicu>janneke: I understand but this is on topic today after
<quiliro>kmicu: we tried that before and it did not work....the most important for me is those 2 things : blog space on the same area or clarification of the blog post
<kmicu>quiliro: are you a GNU maintainer?
<quiliro>not officially...just contribute reporting...not even with code...but with a lot of advocacy and bugs
<quiliro>bug reporting, that is
<roptat>contributing bugs is good too :)
<quiliro>i try to report all that happens
<kmicu>civodul: is that statement only on Guix blog or also somewhere else like ?
<roptat>I think it's only on guix's blog
<roptat>we discussed it already, and it's on guix's blog because it had to be somewhere
<roptat>and it didn't really make sense to all 18 of them to copy that to each other's project too, but they couldn't put it under, because gnu maintainers don't have access to it
<quiliro>i think that several GNU devs and maintainer are frustrated that Richard does not give in they send that manifest
<quiliro>perhaps he even shouted at them...he is very emotional
<quiliro>i have had that situation with Richard...but that is no reason to bundle all guix in with their feelings
<quiliro>just their part of guix
*nckx back.
<kmicu>Thank you roptat.
<quiliro>i am very thankful for all guix devs have done for GNU but that does not mean i will accept an oficial guix position if it not in agreement...i ask for equal space to represent my views also
<CompanionCube>wouldn't the solution here to publish your own views somewhere suitably public?
<kmicu>quiliro: a lot of Guix users use blobs or stock kernel with unfree firmware that doesn’t mean maintainers must let them publish on official Guix channels.
<quiliro>CompanionCube: would not be the same space would not balance out
<quiliro>kmicu: that is a good point
<Tirifto>Hello, saluton.
<count3rmeasure>kmicu: thanks for taking the stand that yall have, its appreciated, and to all of the others hissing and screaming, in the long run this is only going to increase peoples enagagement with your project, precisely because they know that yall care
<quiliro>so the values of guix are that stallman's inocence is not to be held?
<nckx>quiliro: I'm sorry you feel that way. The Guix home page is not a public forum or a wiki for all users. You're free to offer whatever counterpoint you see fit elsewhere.
<quiliro>and it is the position of guix that his position as chief gnusance is to be contended?
<nckx>quiliro: Innocence of what?
<quiliro>i do not feel represented by these views and feel hurt by them
<quiliro>nckx: "Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU"
<nckx>That is no need to censor them or demand opinion space…
<quiliro>he is Innocent
<Tirifto>I, too, have found the views off-putting, although I can't speak as in any way significant part of the Guix community. :/
<quiliro>i do not want to censor anyone...why do you say that
<nckx>Tirifto, count3rmeasure: Hi.
<kmicu>Maintainers are project leaders and gatekeepers. They decide. (And I am here only cuz I value Ludo and Ricardo’s judgemnt.) They are consistent from the beginning.
<quiliro>why not demand space...i am being represented by that post...if i am part of i not part of guix?
<nckx>quiliro: You are not being represented by that post, nor does it make any such claim.
<roptat>that post is not about guix, it's about gnu maintainers
<roptat>at least, 18 of them
<quiliro>kmicu: good that you trust them...I trust Richard
<kmicu>The latest blog entry is nothing surprising. And it’s clear who signed it.
<quiliro>nckx: i am in fact represented by that post if i promote guix, unless there is another post in guix that i can refer to
<nckx>To be quite honest, it feels like you're trying to get someone to say ‘you're not part of Guix’ so you can say ‘Aha!’ and leave.
<nckx>As far as I'm concerned, you are.
<quiliro>nckx: in fact, i want to have it clear eitcer way
<CompanionCube>quiliro: so if the linux kernel makes a blogpsot does that also represent you?
<nckx>This does not mean you get to decide what goes on the home page.
<roptat>quiliro, you are part of guix, but the post is not about you or guix
<quiliro>CompanionCube: of course, if i were to use it
<quiliro>and promote it
<quiliro>maybe i would use it but not promote it...that is why i do not use linux but linux-libre
<CompanionCube>then i would suggest this is where the problem lies: you can use or promote something without uncritically agreeing with everything
<quiliro>and would stop using guix too because i would not feel represented
<quiliro>CompanionCube: no i cannot...i try to be consisitent
<quiliro>not with one foot on each side of the door in case it is convenient
<quiliro>i am faithful to what i preach
<quiliro>i cannot hold two positions at once and do it actively and passionately
<CompanionCube>this is not a binary choice
<quiliro>i believe a person should accept others but should also have firm convictions
<janneke>quiliro: it's a wonderful ideal to hold, but it is impossible in reality
<quiliro>CompanionCube: it is not binary for is for me
<quiliro>nothing is prefect...but it should not be imperfect by design and purpose
<janneke>no two minds on this planet agree on everything -- if you want to find disagreements, you will find them, if you want to find agreements, you will find them
<quiliro>so if we have a common project we must agree on what is on that project...not all our lives
<quiliro>not on*
<nckx>quiliro: This requires you to know the political (I guess? at least?) convictions of all the authors of all the software (Guix is a tiny part of that) you run. That is an impressive feat.
<CompanionCube>nckx: it also requires that the views remain in permanent 1:1 alignment
<quiliro>as those 18 people have agreed on that statement
<CompanionCube>which is even more impressive.
<nckx>quiliro: 21, I just signed ;-)
<nckx>TBH, this is getting off-topic even by my standards, I'm going to write some sweet sweeeet Scheme.
<quiliro>!:! on what is agreed upon
<Tirifto>I think the post is pretty clear on whose views it represents, although an extra notice separating it from the Guix project/community might be nice to add for good measure.
<quiliro>so i what is the position about allowing an alternate blog post on
<kmicu>Going more close to guix… does Guix have a backup url for ? ;) Just in case.
<quiliro>what is the position of its maintainers: democracy or totalitarianism
<nckx>kmicu: Yeah, you're not even kidding :-/ (?) I wondered the same thing.
<kmicu>FSF handles (and pays for) that so maybe we are save. 🤷
<kmicu>Still up? Lovely. Thank you roptat once again.
<roptat>it's just a redirection to
<roptat>but we still have it
<nckx>quiliro: As far as I'm concerned: anarchocommunism! In fact, I'm going to delete all software not written by anarchocommunists from my laptop right now!
<quiliro>nckx: i don't think so
<CompanionCube>quiliro: woosh
<nckx>CompanionCube: Thank you for valiantly defending the honour of my very shitty joke.
***ChanServ sets mode: +o nckx
<quiliro>so who can i ask to get my blog entry posted?
<count3rmeasure>nckx: hello to you too!
<roptat>quiliro, I think there's a mail alias for web admins, but I don't remember what it is
*bavier really wants to start watching guix-patches again
<nckx>bavier: Why that?
<bavier>nckx: just feel like I miss out on things when I don't watch patches coming in.
<nckx>bavier: I get it.
<bavier>and then feel guilty when I notice little things that could have been caught in review
<nckx>It would certainly be much appreciated!
<nckx>I've done the same thing.
<nckx>(And I watch it…)
<quiliro>i would like to make a counter blog post in Guix
*apteryx apteryx slowly catches up with the jet lag
<civodul>howdy apteryx!
<bavier>anyone have experience using 'opam' with guix?
*civodul looks at roptat
<civodul>at the same time, i wonder why one would use opam when there's guix ;-)
<roptat>I packaged it, but I try not to use it
<bavier>just thought it'd be a quick way to get frama-c up an running
<bavier>turns out not as fast as hoped
<roptat>you could import it
<bavier>guix import: error: failed to download meta-data for package 'frama-c'
<bavier>probably why I started that frama-c package a while back; time to dust it off
<civodul>frama-c would be great to have!
<civodul>it's a big one, though
<bavier>iirc I got stuck at the alt-ergo dependencies
<nckx>(Is this at all related to the frama.*\.org services? No, right?)
<bavier>nckx: no :)
<bavier>I do like the frama.*\.org services too though
<nckx>Well that's not confusing at all (at least to a non-francophone). What does ‘frama-’ mean, anyway, if anything?
<vapid> powerful
<jlicht> hiya guix
<vapid>thanks to whoever came up with this shit
<nckx>jlicht, vapid: Hi! vapid: You're welcome, but please keep it civil.
<vapid>yes, of course
<jlicht>congrats to the fine folks who drafted the joint statement! I like how focused on the way forward it is. Where are discussions on possible future 'governance' structures is being held, or does that happen behind closed doors for now?
<roptat>nckx, it's a contraction of "français" and "mathématiques" because it was started by a French teacher and a Maths teacher iirc
<jlicht>s/is being/being/
<civodul>roptat: oh really? didn't know that
<civodul>sounds very much like "pharmacy", which is unfortunate :-)
<roptat>I mean, about framasoft, unrelated to frama-c
<civodul>jlicht: there's currently no public forum for that
<civodul>roptat: ah, sorry
<vapid>"Yet, we must also acknowledge that Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: the empowerment of all computer users." maybe someone might want to throw in a link explaining why
<jlicht>nckx: thanks for the reminder, I'm reading up on the logs.. oof!
<nckx>bavier: Ah, thanks. My french isn't *that* bad (he lied) but it always sounded strange to me. It's not a word, that's why.
<civodul>vapid: you could look at or for two examples
<civodul>the point of the statement is that there's a pattern
*civodul -> zZz
<civodul>good night/day!
*jlicht sees that his exact question has been asked several times today, and hides in a corner...