From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fMiUj-0006g8-LO for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2018 19:21:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fMiUg-0001Qn-FQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2018 19:21:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:42111) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fMiUg-0001QZ-C0 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2018 19:21:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fMiUg-0007jL-5H for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2018 19:21:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#30693] Xonotic Resent-Message-ID: Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 23:21:24 +0000 From: Nils Gillmann Message-ID: <20180526232124.6tc72eh5kirqm7cf@abyayala> References: <20180303233427.olbz5visu3c5urms@abyayala> <20180525164150.046d365d@mykolab.com> <877enqys46.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <877enqys46.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: ng0@n0.is, Rutger Helling , 30693@debbugs.gnu.org Ludovic Courtès transcribed 514 bytes: > Hello Rutger & Nils, > > Thanks for taking care of this! > > One minor issue: ‘x11-style’ is a procedure, not a object, > hence: > > $ ./pre-inst-env guix lint xonotic > gnu/packages/games.scm:5153:13: xonotic@0.8.2: invalid license field > > ‘x11-style’ takes a URI as an argument. I’d fix it myself but I’m not > sure what needs to go there. Could you take a look? Perhaps ng0 knows > why ‘x11-style’ is listed? > > Thanks in advance, > Ludo’. Sorry, no idea. My original patch has x11 instead of x11-style. As I already wrote, from my perspective this was far from ready for merge, but basic functionality is there (it works in one mode) and it passed one review. I think I changed some bits after moving it out of gnu/packages, but I haven't read the package definition in a while. Definitely wasn't me who put x11 instead of x11-style there.