From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miguel Arruga Vivas Subject: Re: 'core-updates' Q4 2019 Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:58:24 +0100 Message-ID: <20191108015824.6fa80912@gmail.com> References: <87sgo252cq.fsf@devup.no> <878sprf1zk.fsf@posteo.net> <87ftjxd30v.fsf@gnu.org> <874l0ag5kv.fsf@posteo.net> <87tv8a0x8u.fsf@devup.no> <87v9snnlto.fsf@posteo.net> <87wod02714.fsf@ngyro.com> <87o8ycgkma.fsf@posteo.net> <875zk3ui5p.fsf@posteo.net> <20191104203646.4181f4ca@gmail.com> <87y2wtx5b6.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37959) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iSsbf-0002ZQ-Qm for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 19:58:35 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iSsbd-0008O8-RK for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 19:58:31 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]:44670) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iSsbd-0008M8-Gt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 19:58:29 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id f2so5108744wrs.11 for ; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:58:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87y2wtx5b6.fsf@posteo.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" To: Kei Kebreau Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Kei, Kei Kebreau writes: > Miguel Arruga Vivas writes: > Boot and login worked properly for me after I cleared the contents of > my /var/lib/gdm directory (if it's unclear why that directory > matters, see > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-10/msg00421.html > for a quick overview). Great pointer, thank you, and good that it's solved. > > - The patch for gedit contains a reference to libgd, wouldn't it be > > clearer for the reader/updater to have it defined in a let over > > the package definition and use the name in native-inputs? > > > > I'm not sure. I don't know if there is an explicit convention for > packaging software that is distributed like this, and the examples of > this in the code base (that I've seen, at least) define the > third-party library the way I've done it here. I'm open to change on > this point though. This actually should have been an open question, as I have a patch on libosinfo, related with gnome-boxes (patches coming soon) and it doesn't feel right for me having usb.ids and pci.ids hidden there, so I've put another origin needed (osinfo-db) out there. > > - Is there any reason to not patch-out the gtk-icon-update-cache > > invocations? If I understand it correctly, this is performed at > > profile level, so makes no sense creating a cache at package > > level, isn't it? The patches for quadrapassel, gnome-klotski, ghex, > > gnome-sudoku, gnome-mines, five-or-more and gedit contain > > references to it. Maybe creating a package like > > xorg-server-for-tests (perhaps 'gtk-bin-for-build'?) linked to > > "true" from coreutils would help in the long term. > > > > I don't think such a reason exists. I could add changes that > substitute calls to "gtk-icon-update-cache" with "true" for these > packages, but I agree that a better solution may be possible. > Perhaps not a package; maybe a new 'patch-gtk-icon-update-cache' > phase in the relevant build systems? Some of these packages already have phases for it on master. I rebased your branch onto it (1a9df94cec..fb936351d3), I had to solve two merge conflicts: devhelp and totem. devhelp's patch has only a trivial conflict, as there was no arguments parameter before. OTOH, I did not check as much as I should totem's last day, as now I have one question here: Who kills the Xvfb server on display :1 after the tests? I see it's a common idiom, but I don't get why shouldn't the daemon treat it like from any other process and wait for it to reach completion (other than technical means, I mean). This could be a great place for a #:xorg-for-tests?, should I try? > > As a final comment, the gnome release cycle and the amount of > > packages involved is quite big, so again, thank you. > > > > Happy hacking! > > Miguel > > Thanks Miguel! This comment and review means a lot! > Kei Thank you too Best regards, Miguel