From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carlo Zancanaro Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add kakoune Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:43:28 +1100 Message-ID: <87y3xx7b0f.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> References: <87zijekrns.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <87y3yykov6.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <20161230192556.GA2668@jasmine> <87wpehkns6.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <20170110222611.GA8431@jasmine> <87vat9uqqd.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <87efzq3yxq.fsf@gnu.org> <87o9yut3b0.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <878tpx4lrq.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45953) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWrpT-0005sV-Ff for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:43:44 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWrpP-0008FX-08 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:43:39 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::244]:35913) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWrpO-0008F7-RN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:43:34 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-x244.google.com with SMTP id 19so17139610pfo.3 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 13:43:34 -0800 (PST) In-reply-to: <878tpx4lrq.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> 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: Marius Bakke Cc: guix-devel --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, Jan 26 2017, Marius Bakke wrote > I replaced the patch file with a substitution phase instead ... . Is this the preferred way to patch reproducibility issues? I don't really have a sense of it, but the other packages I have seen have used either a patch or a snippet to make a build reproducible. I don't really have a sense of when I should use a patch, a snippet, or a phase. Can you give me a sense of when I should prefer one over the others? Carlo --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEETnMK3I26XHaBYsl5wFUlyLtgbSsFAliKbYAACgkQwFUlyLtg bStuxgf9Gs0XJt2vl0kSCiJXBqbtWCQluBOQhUYiRx68viC4ZV6sf29zrnEo+A6j cdvQKDGhipEyawrtBgIbP/XxicGSC7SclwIpVjpi2ZUFcEM5/QJ0RCF+yogGd35e q2p9CJkvevfr5UpdFDCXDyH90dLzwXEaWsSesdmmdPk7anyhxbgAfpWQ32e/Q3eP aBd469+ANf2IDRXV6v4lNpY9A4Oralr5BKdvsc8ZvdW7cl3mZK4nv2W97ZsP98El xOOLYDr5+o7STqt9Ot2NEc2k5wP+ya1I7V0NC9WNqTHIkI5+mnYamPqPlpfGHUTX TSAmLW8mNkcNmX5951iZB7f5t2qTsQ== =ReK1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--