bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

2023-01-22 Thread Liliana Marie Prikler
Am Dienstag, dem 17.01.2023 um 10:55 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer: > Liliana Marie Prikler writes: > > > The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though > > it has been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal. > > > > * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

2023-01-19 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Liliana Marie Prikler skribis: > The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though it has > been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal. > > * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-compilation-driver’. > --- > Thanks Josselin for pointing this out. Yay,

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

2023-01-17 Thread Maxim Cournoyer
Liliana Marie Prikler writes: > The ‘patch-compilation-driver’ phase pulls in libgccjit even though it has > been deliberately removed from emacs-minimal. > > * gnu/packages/emacs.scm (emacs)[#:phases]: Delete ‘patch-compilation-driver’. > --- > Thanks Josselin for pointing this out. I'd add

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

2023-01-15 Thread Josselin Poiret via Bug reports for GNU Guix
Hi Lily, Liliana Marie Prikler writes: > This is rather curious. How does libgccjit land in emacs-minimal's > closure? The patch-compilation-driver phase in the inherited emacs package wires in a reference to libgccjit. It would need to be replaced in emacs-minimal. Best, -- Josselin

bug#60831: Are our graphs okay?

2023-01-15 Thread Liliana Marie Prikler
Hi Guix, Continuing the discussion Ludo’ started over at guix-devel regarding package size, note that we have $ guix size emacs-minimal Store-Objekt Gesamt Selbst /gnu/store/lphzb1z0r4kbb453rsvnw7msrxxzp5r7-libgccjit-10.3.0 244.8