Jookia <166...@gmail.com> skribis:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:14:53PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> iyzs...@member.fsf.org (宋文武) skribis:
>> I don’t think so. :-)
>>
>> From what I understand the problem is that we end up with the two
>> variants of gdk-pixbuf in the dependency graph, and i
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:14:53PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> iyzs...@member.fsf.org (宋文武) skribis:
> I don’t think so. :-)
>
> From what I understand the problem is that we end up with the two
> variants of gdk-pixbuf in the dependency graph, and it turns out that
> it’s not the one we were
iyzs...@member.fsf.org (宋文武) skribis:
> Report by Jookia in #guix that with my gdk-pixbuf+svg patches,
> thunar still can't find SVG icons, it's linked with the old gdk-pixbuf.
>
> While the build inputs of ‘thunar’ only have ‘gdk-pixbuf+svg’, one
> of its input ‘libnotify’ was build with ‘gdk-pix
Report by Jookia in #guix that with my gdk-pixbuf+svg patches,
thunar still can't find SVG icons, it's linked with the old gdk-pixbuf.
While the build inputs of ‘thunar’ only have ‘gdk-pixbuf+svg’, one
of its input ‘libnotify’ was build with ‘gdk-pixbuf’. It didn’t
propagated it but it’s in ‘libn