On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 05:36:48AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> > gtk+@3 -> at-spi2-atk -> at-spi2-core -> gtk-doc -> dblatex -> imagemagick
>
> It occurs to me that we could add "stable" variants of the
> 'imagemagick', 'dblatex', and 'gtk-doc' packages. The stable variants
> would be used as n
Mark H Weaver writes:
> The following dependency chain seems to be responsible for most of the
> imagemagick-dependent packages:
>
> gtk+@3 -> at-spi2-atk -> at-spi2-core -> gtk-doc -> dblatex -> imagemagick
It occurs to me that we could add "stable" variants of the
'imagemagick', 'dblatex', and
Hi Leo,
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:14:03PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>> The following dependency chain seems to be responsible for most of the
>> imagemagick-dependent packages:
>>
>> gtk+@3 -> at-spi2-atk -> at-spi2-core -> gtk-doc -> dblatex -> imagemagick
Leo Famulari writes:
> To clarif
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:14:03PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Leo Famulari writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 09:40:04AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> >> I knew this couldn't be right, but I thought I remembered it having
> >> fewer dependencies. Oh well. Sorry for the noise.
> >
> > It's
Leo Famulari writes:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 09:40:04AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>> I knew this couldn't be right, but I thought I remembered it having
>> fewer dependencies. Oh well. Sorry for the noise.
>
> It's relatively new that ImageMagick is depended on by so many packages.
> I thin
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 09:40:04AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> I knew this couldn't be right, but I thought I remembered it having
> fewer dependencies. Oh well. Sorry for the noise.
It's relatively new that ImageMagick is depended on by so many packages.
I think we should look into this and s
Earlier, I wrote:
> Why is imagemagick grafted, anyway? I think it can simply be updated
> without causing many rebuilds, no?
Actually, I see now that it would cause many more rebuilds than is
appropriate for master.
mhw@jojen ~$ guix refresh -l imagemagick
Building the following 1270 packag
Hi Mark,
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 at 08:51, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> This is really nasty. Why is imagemagick grafted, anyway? I think it
> can simply be updated without causing many rebuilds, no?
--8<---cut here---start->8---
$ guix refresh -l imagemagick@6.9.11-
Hi Léo,
Regarding your commit:
> From 2e0ff59f0cd836b156f1ef2e78791d864ce3cfcd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Léo Le Bouter
> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 11:12:51 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: imagemagick/fixed: Redirect old sonames to new sonames.
>
> * gnu/packages/imagemagic
