Author: ludo
Date: Sat Oct 15 23:25:12 2011
New Revision: 29856
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29856&sc=1
Log:
GNU M4: Have a test work around flaws in newer Linux versions.
Added:
nixpkgs/branches/stdenv-updates/pkgs/development/tools/misc/gnum4/readlink-EINVAL.patch
Modified:
nix
Author: NicolasPierron
Date: Sat Oct 15 21:01:30 2011
New Revision: 29855
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29855&sc=1
Log:
Add support for NFS root file system.
Patch by Rickard Nilsson.
Modified:
nixos/trunk/modules/system/boot/stage-1-init.sh
nixos/trunk/modules/system/boot/stage-1
Author: eelco
Date: Mon Oct 10 21:32:34 2011
New Revision: 29745
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29745&sc=1
Log:
* Refactoring: remove unnecessary variables from the tests.
Modified:
nix/trunk/tests/add.sh
nix/trunk/tests/binary-patching.sh
nix/trunk/tests/build-hook.sh
nix/tru
Hi Peter,
> > But there are plenty of "-wrapper"s, but only ghc and python use it
> > as a suffix _after_ the version. This results in python-2.7.1 being
> > "upgraded" to python-2.7.1-wrapper by 'nix-env -u \*'.
>
> apparently, you consider that a problem? Why is that?
Because -u relies on a
Author: ludo
Date: Sat Oct 15 16:34:26 2011
New Revision: 29854
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29854&sc=1
Log:
Guile: Disable more GC-sensitive tests when using `-O0'.
Modified:
nixpkgs/trunk/pkgs/development/interpreters/guile/disable-gc-sensitive-tests.patch
Modified:
nixpkgs/trun
Hi Florian,
> But there are plenty of "-wrapper"s, but only ghc and python use it
> as a suffix _after_ the version. This results in python-2.7.1 being
> "upgraded" to python-2.7.1-wrapper by 'nix-env -u \*'.
apparently, you consider that a problem? Why is that?
> Why not python-wrapper-2.
Author: roconnor
Date: Sat Oct 15 14:46:05 2011
New Revision: 29853
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29853&sc=1
Log:
updating dwarf-fortress
Modified:
nixpkgs/trunk/pkgs/games/dwarf-fortress/default.nix
Modified: nixpkgs/trunk/pkgs/games/dwarf-fortress/default.nix
==
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:54:40 +0200, Peter Simons wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> > the attribute name for pythonXYFull is python-X.Y.Z-wrapper. I'd
> > consider python-X.Y.Z-full to be more intuitive. Anything against
> > renaming?
>
> use of the suffix "-wrapper" is very common in Nix. GCC follows
Hi,
what is responsible that below there are no "site.py*" and
easy-install.pth anymore after two modules are installed into the
profile? I'm not saying its bad, but I'd like to understand how.
I understand with only one module installed, the lib folder is linked
From the unittest2 derivation. O
Author: urkud
Date: Sat Oct 15 13:32:05 2011
New Revision: 29852
URL: https://nixos.org/websvn/nix/?rev=29852&sc=1
Log:
Fix comment
Modified:
nixpkgs/trunk/pkgs/desktops/kde-4.7/kde-package/default.nix
Modified: nixpkgs/trunk/pkgs/desktops/kde-4.7/kde-package/default.nix
=
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:51:25 -0700, s...@shealevy.com wrote:
> >>> <4e5566e6.9050...@shealevy.com> <4e5b97be.5030...@tudelft.nl>)
> 1. Would we still need stdenv-updates, or could we just use feature
> branches for the individual update we care about then merge it into
> >>> Of course, we w
Hi Florian,
> the attribute name for pythonXYFull is python-X.Y.Z-wrapper. I'd
> consider python-X.Y.Z-full to be more intuitive. Anything against
> renaming?
use of the suffix "-wrapper" is very common in Nix. GCC follows the
same naming scheme, and so does GHC. I don't see what we would gain
Ok, thank you for your explanation.
Marco
Quoting Michael Raskin <7c6f4...@mail.ru>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> there are some functions in nixpkgs that I always avoided to use
>> and understand.
>> A couple of them are builderDefs and composedArgsAndFun.
>> I'm reading their implementation right now but t
NixOS #145 (15 Oct)By Paul Dufresneaufs oops when about to login on installation CDI burnt and verify (twice) my image (more if you count the one that were bad): paul@paul-P5GZ-MX:~$ md5sum nixos-graphical-0.1pre29826-i686-linux.iso 164774618b05c3633124bf6ef793d5e8 nixos-graphical-0.1pre29826-i686-
Excerpts from Paul Dufresne's message of Sat Oct 15 09:34:43 +0200 2011:
> Wonder if it is worth to extract the full log of the oops, by getting
> this old null-modem RS232C cable I must have somewhere, even if it is
> not on latest kernel. This CD is using 2.6.39. I guess Linux people
> won't care
I tested my NixOS CD that was giving kernel oops on my computer on an
other computer today,
Seems to go fine on the other computer.
So I guess this is linked to recent Linux versions, and my particular
hardware: a N10/ICH7 Intel computer with a SATA disk 82801G rev 01.
Wonder if it is worth to ex
16 matches
Mail list logo
