From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laura Lazzati Subject: Re: Video narration Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 15:16:21 -0300 Message-ID: References: <68df0dd806a3e7f55db08feb70d246263bb6b47f.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <6c27e60e2909fd7ff3f85237e181e9a8a4e63468.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <05bf11a582920d81ffa1494e6eb2f5e85503638e.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <871s313bth.fsf@elephly.net> <660de50483d54150fa1ca67ebd0cae886d0ffcbe.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <52a3d40df1ee349f48e7ecd79756e9307cbae034.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <5893d6b8dc2dd4ed1cdcab3e109ce655d82bc493.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <6f60665f899c24133818106831f378f087b9d405.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <808a07682b858d44b1e48c69fd98fcb770837789.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <0f4db135b01c57d8ab2fbf6721587664507dcefc.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> <3f393bb53fa8d04c0e9ae33df1eeadaf864940d5.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35392) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBNy0-0006ZN-Dr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:17:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBNxz-0003kD-KR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:17:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: 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: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= Cc: Guix-devel , Paul Garlick Hi :) > Sorry, I am late to the party. To clarify things, the following is > happening here: > 1. at first guix is built from source, in a guix environment guix > 2. the package is added > 3. the package build is tested using pre-inst-env guix build package > > So, the environment is not for r-aspi, but to get to the exact environment where > the pre-inst-env was built, so the third step is reproducible. > > Does that make sense? Yes, that was the way I packaged and what was trying to explain, and asked the others in case I was wrong. Regards :) Laura