From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] gnu: Don't use guix build utils Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:15:23 -0500 Message-ID: <20160218001523.GB26345@jasmine> References: <1455379675-27516-1-git-send-email-mail@cbaines.net> <1455379675-27516-3-git-send-email-mail@cbaines.net> <20160213223918.GB1176@jasmine> <56C4BBC2.7070103@cbaines.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42018) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aWCFn-00086n-Fu for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:15:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aWCFh-00046F-IP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:15:31 -0500 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:34349) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aWCFh-00046B-EC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:15:25 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56C4BBC2.7070103@cbaines.net> 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: Christopher Baines Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 06:28:18PM +0000, Christopher Baines wrote: > On 13/02/16 22:39, Leo Famulari wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 04:07:54PM +0000, Christopher Baines wrote: > >> As this provides a which procedure which conflicts with the which package > >> provided by gnu packages base. > >> > >> * gnu/packages/version-control.scm (version-control): Don't use utils > > > > I can build all the packages in version-control.scm with this change, > > but I don't fully understand its implications so I'll wait for another > > reviewer to weigh in. > > Andreas has now commented on this in response to the third patch. > > > If it's okay, I will squash this commit into "Add vcsh", since that > > commit is broken without this one. > > This does not make much sense to me, as they are separate changes, and > when applied in the right sequence, everything will work (but it really > depends what workflow you are using with Git). The commit that removes the module only makes sense in the context of adding vcsh. It's analogous to adding a module that is required for a new package, and that is done in a single commit. So, I think it's better to squash the commits.