bug#71730: Manual section 2.6.5 on Emacs Packages needs updating regarding native-compilation

Hello, I just noticed that the Guix manual at , in section 2.6.5, says: Note: Emacs can now compile packages natively. Under the default configuration, this means that Emacs packages will now be just-in-time (JIT) compiled as you use them, and the

bug#71729: Emacs 29.4 emergency bugfix release

Hello, Today an emergency bugfix release was made of Emacs v29.4. It fixes an important security vulnerability. FWIW, I had hoped that I could install it by running: guix install --with-version=emacs=29.4 emacs But that fails the validate-comp-integrity phase, showing that all of its

bug#71725: Emacs emacs-disable-jit-compilation.patch prevents native compilation of packages installed outside of Guix?

Hello, I've been installing and running Emacs through Guix as a foreign distro for a few years now, and since native compilation was added in Emacs 28 (before it was even released), I've enjoyed using it to the full, including having Elisp packages which are installed directly inside Emacs

bug#70456: Request for merging "core-updates" branch

Hey, I've spent a bunch of time in the last few days trying to see if I can get the bordeaux build farm moving on core-updates and I think things are moving at pace now. Builds are happening for 6 systems, with the only major omission being i586-gnu, I think there are existing issues with the

bug#28510: crash: guix build -S foo --with-source=bla

On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 4:54 PM Vincent Legoll wrote: > Looking at the comments in this issue, and the commenters list, > I propose to remove the "easy" tag, if the issue is still there. > Looks like it is, the above reproducer from Maxime is still failing: [...] Throw to key `match-error' with

bug#28510: crash: guix build -S foo --with-source=bla

Hello, Looking at the comments in this issue, and the commenters list, I propose to remove the "easy" tag, if the issue is still there. WDYT ? -- Vincent Legoll

bug#71700: The Archiving functionality of guix lint should be opt-in and Documented more prominently

Hi Richard, On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 at 09:21, Richard Sent wrote: > I think there is a good reason to support disabling archival at the > channel level. Simon, do you think your patch can/will manage that? Yeah it could be helpful. However, my patch does not address at this level. I agree it

bug#71700: The Archiving functionality of guix lint should be opt-in and Documented more prominently

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 09:21:01 -0400 Richard Sent wrote: > I think channel level configuration of some form for code archival is a > good idea so individual channels can choose to disable it. I also agree > that we should make the fact that guix lint does archival more > prominent. > > I disagree

bug#71700: The Archiving functionality of guix lint should be opt-in and Documented more prominently

I think channel level configuration of some form for code archival is a good idea so individual channels can choose to disable it. I also agree that we should make the fact that guix lint does archival more prominent. I disagree with a statement that permission is required, but I'll avoid

bug#71695: guix-install.sh REQUIRE check for SYSV_INIT_REQUIRE

The fix looks good to me. I don't have commit access so you may want to send it off to guix-patches so it's not lost. (info "(guix) Submitting Patches") If you can, please submit in plaintext. The formatting here looks odd. :) -- Take it easy, Richard Sent Making my computer weirder one commit