From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55848) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ij945-0003Ye-FW for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 16:47:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ij944-0000AT-6o for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 16:47:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44367) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ij943-00007T-LA for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 16:47:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ij942-00048Y-HG for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 16:47:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#38553] [PATCH 01/12] gnu: Add grantleetheme. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20191209215219.24247-1-h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> <20191209215358.24449-1-h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> <87immckle4.fsf@gnu.org> <176afb50-286a-6b0b-b6cb-25090adc4630@crazy-compilers.com> <874kxtmfvf.fsf@gnu.org> From: Hartmut Goebel Message-ID: Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 22:46:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <874kxtmfvf.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US 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: 38553@debbugs.gnu.org Hi, Am 22.12.19 um 00:13 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > Actually, unless I’m mistaken, (guix build qt-build-system) is not in > scope by default. To fix it, we need: Oh, seems like a bug in qt-build.system. Many thanks for spotting this. I just submitted a patch for this (ubs, I missed "Coauthored-by Ludo", will add immediately), see http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38711 >> This seems to be common to many KDE packages including programs, libs >> and docs. Programs have GPL, libs have LGPL and docs have FDL. Of course >> I can add a respective comment, which most of the packages would get. Is >> this your intention? > Oh I see. Yes, that was my intention, but I guess you could make a > super-concise one-line summary of that. WDYT about this format? I would then apply this to all KDE packages in my pipeline.     (license ;; GPL for programs, LGPL for libraries, FDL for documentation      (list license:gpl2+ license:lgpl2.0+ license:fdl1.2+)))) -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |