From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48865) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hi66j-0003b2-5n for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:53:23 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hi66g-0007WL-1L for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:53:12 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hi66Z-0007Uo-3A for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:53:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hi66Y-0004HI-W8 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:53:03 -0400 Subject: [bug#36404] [PATCH 2/5] gnu: Add machine type for deployment specifications. Resent-Message-ID: From: zerodaysfordays@sdf.lonestar.org (Jakob L. Kreuze) References: <87o92ianbj.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> <87imspj0ks.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org> <87ef3dj0j9.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org> <87a7e1j0hy.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org> <87k1d4kra8.fsf@dustycloud.org> <877e93ewyj.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> <8736jrvfcw.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <87a7dzl09t.fsf@dustycloud.org> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:51:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87a7dzl09t.fsf@dustycloud.org> (Christopher Lemmer Webber's message of "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:34:38 -0400") Message-ID: <875zolb9ex.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" 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: Christopher Lemmer Webber Cc: 36404@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Christopher Lemmer Webber writes: > Jakob, do you mind checking out the issue above? I think it shouldn't > block merging these patches but perhaps we should file an issue saying > that when the shepherd issue is merged, changes should be made to guix > deploy as well. What do you think? I took a peek and added a comment about it to machine.scm, are you suggesting that we track it on debbugs? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEa1VJLOiXAjQ2BGSm9Qb9Fp2P2VoFAl0anJYACgkQ9Qb9Fp2P 2Vo0rg//SzvtNWytn3zn/yzDzO8ddYIZn5YCeOQYkHznEXHKEWQCCqfjF02LTcMu Y22kL+9jkry7mBaBMKbpJBdORWZ1tb0e1LdVf4JuWnniep1JW89B0J9e42iLt288 XiW4gx5CmS222MdsLtjdDDt9FRN99tI8qUzJp2CtcLYzyO66eBrSjC0dK5nTM9HL lk6OpsBdu5OXVYC4mmWrmOiX+fnf0UbjImqgwFEdBD8Wal+Wg8XpAeCA7lMQJTY/ 16et0A36STT2aBa6FUwOZGOSw/z7ab28aw2Wtoh6GDpEhNlwfMpSg2kh5Hinq8gE iN8muqMEd0+RhHMRnzaBawd6gWFvaHalHzBrV7t7hc2AD94ahiEICDvE54vgzHQQ 2Q27Y/fVyG24JObg0YjUnWIII3tsABbnBgwpu5SD7rG/RhMI+Ct8/pjGCLKMU0dL kX2EsGiRpae9kGga0Bc163z2Io+aGCTjBdE/PMdYtsIZf34X8+0pLvLps30iN3hP 5FZ9xHlCxC4sJIq+16qx4kKF2PfuSwcadn35ERr+5pXVTyOGPfDDZj5unB9axOc+ Av302u/8kcuz/idkvjC6cfDQKzIOn/iCm7LNsoF/mvtjGBNzFKMUu7yeYWj3iJYO Y1gLKf4WO3IreokrT7AootZFEbBNndx30uM99O0NPCJQ4NFgQnc= =pJQU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--