On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:33:11PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> >> I thought a bit about it before and I don't really think it'll save that
> >> much
> >> space. Most of the time the headers are a small part of the total package,
> >> and the fine-tuning that comes with chosing exactly which out
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Efraim Flashner skribis:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:32:22 +0100
>> Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Guix,
>>>
>>> should we install headers to separate outputs as we do it in some cases
>>> for really large documentation? It seems wrong to me to download
>>> substit
Efraim Flashner skribis:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:32:22 +0100
> Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
>> Hi Guix,
>>
>> should we install headers to separate outputs as we do it in some cases
>> for really large documentation? It seems wrong to me to download
>> substitutes for libraries when at build time
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:32:22 +0100
Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Hi Guix,
>
> should we install headers to separate outputs as we do it in some cases
> for really large documentation? It seems wrong to me to download
> substitutes for libraries when at build time only certain headers are
> needed.
>
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 09:32:22PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Other distributions have separate “*-devel” or “*-dev” packages (and I’m
> ambivalent about this) — would it be a bad idea if we provided “devel”
> or “dev” *outputs* so that users had more control over what ends up in
> their store?
Hi Guix,
should we install headers to separate outputs as we do it in some cases
for really large documentation? It seems wrong to me to download
substitutes for libraries when at build time only certain headers are
needed.
Other distributions have separate “*-devel” or “*-dev” packages (and I’m
