Jason Self ja...@bluehome.net skribis:
Ludovic Courtès said:
Yes, I understand this, but my question was more about how this occurs
technically.
My understanding is that Debian-based distros provide the unmodified
upstream source, with a debian/patches tree containing patches they
apply.
Sam Geeraerts sam...@elmundolibre.be skribis:
Op Sat, 14 Sep 2013 15:01:13 +0200
schreef l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès):
My understanding is that Debian-based distros provide the unmodified
upstream source, with a debian/patches tree containing patches they
apply. Do I get it right?
For
Ludovic Courtès said:
I’ve come up with a plan that will allow Guix to behave similarly [0].
Good good. :)
I do have another question about how to apply the FSDG guidelines to Guix.
Specifically in the Complete Distros section it mentions that if
using it requires further work or presupposes
Or is being installable alongside a 100% free
distro acceptable? Or...?
My understanding was always that a distro had to be bootable to be
listed. Complete in themselves ..., and self-hosting both seem
pretty clear to me. But you, or whomever, could always ask rms if you
think there's
k...@freefriends.org (Karl Berry) skribis:
So, do we want ‘guix build --source’ to return the already-patched,
FSDG-compliant source?
It should return exactly the sources which actually got built -- which I
gather, though I'm not sure, is not necessarily the same as unmodified
Op Sat, 14 Sep 2013 15:01:13 +0200
schreef l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès):
My understanding is that Debian-based distros provide the unmodified
upstream source, with a debian/patches tree containing patches they
apply. Do I get it right?
For gNewSense we do as follows. If the software
Ludovic Courtès said:
Yes, I understand this, but my question was more about how this occurs
technically.
My understanding is that Debian-based distros provide the unmodified
upstream source, with a debian/patches tree containing patches they
apply. Do I get it right?
Ah, I see. In the
ôòøguix build --sourceôòù should be changed to return the result of
applying
that ôòøpatchôòù phase to the upstream tarball. WDYT?
Sounds right.
in that it provides the /complete/ build recipe that led to the
binaryôòóôòücompleteôòý means that it includes build scripts,
Sam Geeraerts sam...@elmundolibre.be skribis:
Op Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:05:35 +0200
schreef l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès):
[...]
The distro obviously contains only free software, and it follows the
FSF free system distribution guidelines [2]; it is not based on any
existing distribution.
Ludovic Courtès said:
I'm reluctant because of the technical and administrative burden it
entails
I suppose another option is to leave out problematic packages
entirely. Otherwise, welcome to the world of being an FSF-endorsed
distro. :)
Besides, our package meta-data would probably still
Hello,
The GNU Guix project [0] is about producing (1) a package manager for
the GNU system, and (2) a distribution of the GNU system (currently on
top of Linux-Libre). We would like the distribution to be officially
recognized as an offspring of the fully free distro family. ;-)
Part (1) is
Sam Geeraerts said:
Note that some packages may contain non-free files (e.g. [a]),
regardless of the license of the whole. There are also freedom issues
that are unrelated to the license of the code, e.g. encouraging the use
of non-free software [b]. I see that your packaging guidelines
12 matches
Mail list logo
