Ian Eure writes:
> The change is mentioned in the channel news, but it says nothing about
> needing to remove that part of the config.
You are right; I have added more explicit instructions as commit
e5c0ea22e68cc8d6f99957295bc9198afb8455df.
Users should see it when they guix pull again.
Regard
No, this is not a bug. specification->package always returns the latest
version of a package and has no way of knowing what variable(s) that package
object is bound to.
On April 21, 2024 8:02:50 AM PDT, Felix Lechner
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Sat, Apr 20 2024, Ian Eure wrote:
>
>> If an operating-sys
The change is mentioned in the channel news, but it says nothing about needing
to remove that part of the config.
On April 21, 2024 1:32:38 AM PDT, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)"
wrote:
>Hello Ian. My understanding of the nss-certs etc/news.scm item had been
>that we should remove (specificatio
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 20 2024, Ian Eure wrote:
> If an operating-system’s packages includes `(specification->package
> "nss-certs")', this causes breakage, because that form selects version
> 3.98, but %base-packages includes 3.88.1, which causes an error on the
> next `guix system reconfigure' due to
Hello Ian. My understanding of the nss-certs etc/news.scm item had been
that we should remove (specification->package "nss-certs"), which became
unnecessary and clutters config.scm. From what you write, this was
actually not intended, but it is still not a bug IMHO.
(I’m not involved with the ch
Some recent nss-certs changes have a negative side effects which
needs to be fixed.
A patch of mine was pushed recently (commit
0920693381d9f6b7923e69fe00be5de8621ddb6f), which adds nss-certs
3.98 to (gnu packages certs), under the nss-certs-3.98 variable.
Then, commit fdfd7667c66cf9ce746330
