From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carlo Zancanaro Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add awesome. Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 10:57:41 +1000 Message-ID: References: <1465776755-16444-1-git-send-email-carlo@zancanaro.id.au> <1465778333-19689-1-git-send-email-carlo@zancanaro.id.au> <20160613154619.GA13902@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113529c81f9f6c0535327f72 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52761) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bCcg7-0007UJ-RH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:58:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bCcg5-0000Oq-Nr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:58:02 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-x22c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22c]:34217) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bCcg5-0000Om-Jx for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:58:01 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id m2so16328843qtd.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:58:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160613154619.GA13902@jasmine> 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: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --001a113529c81f9f6c0535327f72 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 14 June 2016 at 01:46, Leo Famulari wrote: > I think that imagemagick is only required while building, so it can be a > 'native-input'. > > You can check what packages the built output refers to: $ guix gc > --references $(./pre-inst-env guix build awesome) > > Imagemagick is not in the list. > Thanks for this! I had assumed that the "guix lint" would tell me about something like that, given the check "inputs-should-be-native". Is it possible for those references to be "wrong"? For there to be something which is required at runtime, but doesn't show up in a "guix gc --references" check? > I noticed that several of the files have the "or later" text. If they > are all like that, we could use gpl2+. Did you check if there are any > files with licenses besides GPL2+? > The lua files (in lib/) don't have a license heading beyond a copyright year/author in the luadoc tags. Everything which has a license heading seems to be gpl2+ (I had missed the "or later" text, but I've updated it now). --001a113529c81f9f6c0535327f72 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On 14 June 2016 at 01:46, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> w= rote:
I think that imagemagick is only required while building, so it can be a 'native-input'.

You can check what packages the built output refers to: $ guix gc
--references $(./pre-inst-env guix build awesome)

Imagemagick is not in the list.

Than= ks for this! I had assumed that the "guix lint" would tell me abo= ut something like that, given the check "inputs-should-be-native"= .

Is it possible for those references to be "wrong&q= uot;? For there to be something which is required at runtime, but doesn'= ;t show up in a "guix gc --references" check?
=C2= =A0
I noticed that several of the files have the "or later" text. If = they
are all like that, we could use gpl2+. Did you check if there are any
files with licenses besides GPL2+?

The = lua files (in lib/) don't have a license heading beyond a copyright yea= r/author in the luadoc tags. Everything which has a license heading seems t= o be gpl2+ (I had missed the "or later" text, but I've update= d it now).
--001a113529c81f9f6c0535327f72--