From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: Gnunet-0.10.0 recipe Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 23:17:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20140203221717.GA23992@debian> References: <52EA7F73.9010302@totakura.in> <20140130223912.GA12116@debian> <52EAD88B.70409@totakura.in> <52EAE140.8090805@totakura.in> <20140131085355.GA4396@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52896) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WARpk-00009a-Qd for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:17:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WARpV-0007mT-3N for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:17:40 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:52570) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WARpU-0007m5-Qe for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:17:25 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140131085355.GA4396@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Sree Harsha Totakura Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:54:04AM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:33:20AM +0100, Sree Harsha Totakura wrote: > > Here's the new patch with Andreas' changes and Openssl included as a > > dependency. > Thanks, I will have a look later. Finally I made it. For checking purposes, I disabled gstreamer and gst-plugins-base in libextractor. gnunet built without problems and passed all its tests - congratulations! Just one last question: Is there a reason you did not add libmicrohttpd as an input? Or should I add it again? The "official" description printed with "make sync-descriptions" is different, but in fact adds only this sentence: The package includes gnunet-gtk, which provides a GTK+ graphical user interface to the GNUnet service. I think here the official description should be changed. First of all, what is "the package"? And as far as I can tell, gnunet-gtk would be a distinct package. Andreas