From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paul van der Walt <paul@denknerd.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add ghc-bytestring-builder.
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:01:20 +0200
Message-ID: <87611zrwu7.fsf@denknerd.org>
References: <1445483479-19104-1-git-send-email-ericbavier@openmailbox.org>
	<1445483942-24931-1-git-send-email-ericbavier@openmailbox.org>
	<1445483942-24931-3-git-send-email-ericbavier@openmailbox.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33021)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paul@denknerd.org>) id 1ZpDci-0004Li-GR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:01:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paul@denknerd.org>) id 1ZpDce-00055U-JR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:01:32 -0400
Received: from mx01.mykolab.com ([95.128.36.1]:19788 helo=mx-out03.mykolab.com)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paul@denknerd.org>) id 1ZpDce-000551-8P
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:01:28 -0400
In-reply-to: <1445483942-24931-3-git-send-email-ericbavier@openmailbox.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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: ericbavier@openmailbox.org
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org


On 2015-10-22 at 05:18, quoth ericbavier@openmailbox.org:
>> +    (arguments `(#:haddock? #f)) ; FIXME: testing framework unavailable
>
> Did you mean '#:tests? #f'? or is the comment incorrect?

Indeed the package contains no documentation.  Comment fixed.  Also took
the opportunity to improve the description.

Ciao,
p.