From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add most debian patches to nvi.
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:05:47 +0100
Message-ID: <87r3umby1w.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <54BFBAED.3090502@gmail.com> <54BFBB39.5030200@gmail.com>
	<873874w508.fsf@gnu.org> <54BFC4FF.5030006@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45602)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1YEKGb-0000bS-I5
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:05:58 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1YEKGT-0001hU-MG
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:05:57 -0500
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:51249)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1YEKGT-0001hJ-FJ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:05:49 -0500
In-Reply-To: <54BFC4FF.5030006@gmail.com> (Marek Benc's message of "Wed, 21
	Jan 2015 16:25:51 +0100")
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: Marek Benc <merkur32@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Marek Benc <merkur32@gmail.com> skribis:

> On 01/21/2015 04:03 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>> I agree with Andreas: there are 20 patches, and that level of patching
>> goes beyond our mission, IMO.
>>
>> I would rather leave it as is if it=E2=80=99s usable, or remove it, or p=
oint to
>> a new upstream if there is one.
>
> In that case, I think at least two of the patches should be allowed to
> get in, the ones about the Berkely db library, since it's spewing out
> errors without them. (but the editor itself works)

You mean there are run-time errors without nvi-db4.patch?  What kind?

The second patch is about page sizes apparently.  Do you know what the
deal is?

Two/three patches would be OK, but we need to have an understanding of
why we=E2=80=99re carrying these particular patches.

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.