From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Gerwitz Subject: Re: gnumaint changes Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:55:05 -0400 Message-ID: <87h8lnoeti.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20180627082345.5a23mezrrltcdbnl@abyayala> <8736x7pu2k.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56457) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYM9l-0005jE-Dr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:55:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYM9k-0008Ls-5U for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:55:33 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:60203) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYM9k-0008LZ-0u for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:55:32 -0400 Received: from localhost ([::1]:32967 helo=mikegerwitz-pc.gerwitz.local) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fYM9j-0003zV-3E for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:55:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <8736x7pu2k.fsf@gnu.org> (Mike Gerwitz's message of "Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:40:19 -0400") 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: guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 21:40:19 -0400, Mike Gerwitz wrote: > I'll have to look at what guix/gnu-maintenance.scm does, but: [...] > Rather than get rid of gnupackages.txt completely, I wrote a script last > week to generate it from rec/gnupackages.rec. The formats are largely > the same---it's possible that you can use the recfile directly. > However, if you still need the old format, just run > `make gnupackages.txt`. Ah, I see, it fetches that single file over HTTP. Certainly running `make` (or the underlying gawk script) is undesirable in that situation. Can someone with more knowledge of what this is used for run a couple of tests to see what is broken if you use rec/gnupackages.rec instead? Worst case, I can commit gnupackages.txt until the script can be updated, but I'd prefer to keep generated files out of the repository. pkgblurbs.txt has also been replaced by rec/pkgblurbs.rec. If anyone here also knows of any other external systems pulling from womb, please lmk. I wasn't aware that anyone outside of maintainers@ used that repo, tbh. =2D-=20 Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 https://mikegerwitz.com --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJbND/5AAoJEIyRe39dxRuiwXgQAKxdQBrSc1G5anBABPdrBYKZ pdPoFcVUrspohGSdb0/UKjkuxXT+/h9eJCQyFRrMjC/abr7PR5j2tBg3paJWdHOb tjSAXVCtlMR/virKfl6bTXwpfc6rIeXEBueKbUrBGZIOQrDfLI6iA1Btd6Sh6OhK SPLOW8XzKMJajC3u9NvMuSj6YarK+5BmntuuL2VLVb76uyU3A+IjgFp6P0s5lVj2 i5/8OS/tteyAze16LCz3WVKWFQVCyJa64vSqMveyQWtezd6SOfm1IsLHiUzyVsct 8SvFxUK9sdovLbRteadq5rNkxMW3KUHRsT0Y7Drlo4cib5jhD6k1ZMX/8+KR2aWs 20dqzYdNmY+HLJqUEXpKOHCSAUnnJLDxSbLol8/gAxDHLIvX1Go2WdR+X7NN96QJ q0Rzpjqhbl6MpNdq9XdLHv9qk/qMZ15vXzvBt+MwEvev9d9S31gaB7aYsSadARmZ c+xaA7L0J7dSxEe1IJ4eUUT6tgus7q+fV9BJK2C0g1CnSrWQW/hlyRcnjqgkFcTn dZ0cs+r8lnq5R7ag5x8HHc88Ff5lGtkBzbC4MHyZVPXGJgdma4CWi5gK9XpfL0/P huAvfIkGZEinqjm4SqTXDMfb4JjbbikaqwlNy5a5HSCXihPSXSJ7ydKcBCDpqpM6 Y/LwWthMNCeoLwiBBVLe =Yk/W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--