From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50227) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hqGW3-0003v0-5r for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:37:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hqGVz-0003WJ-Iq for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:37:06 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:55479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hqGVy-0003VX-UF for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:37:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hqGVy-0003uY-Nj for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:37:02 -0400 Subject: bug#36738: [PATCH] guix deploy: Support '--no-grafts' and '--system' Resent-To: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Message-ID: From: iyzsong@member.fsf.org (=?UTF-8?Q?=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6?=) References: <87a7d9l2hw.fsf@member.fsf.org> <874l3eauda.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> <87d0i01ltd.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:36:11 +0800 In-Reply-To: <87d0i01ltd.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Tue, 23 Jul 2019 23:29:50 +0200") Message-ID: <87wog7zk1w.fsf@member.fsf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 36738-done@debbugs.gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hello, > > zerodaysfordays@sdf.lonestar.org (Jakob L. Kreuze) skribis: > >> Hello Wenwu, >> iyzsong@member.fsf.org (=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6) writes: >> >>> Hello, this patch handle the '--no-grafts' command line option: >>> ... >>> And '--system', so I can deploy a "i686-linux" from my "x86_64-linux": >> >> These patches look good to me, thank you! >> >> Ludo, Dave, Chris, any additional comments? > > Fine with me! > > I agree with Dave that we should avoid adding a =E2=80=98system-type=E2= =80=99 field to > , at least for now. Instead, we should just honor > (%current-system). > > Thanks, > Ludo=E2=80=99. Pushed, thanks for the reviews!