From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] gnu: Add Tomb. Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:50:35 -0400 Message-ID: <20160823235035.GB24374@jasmine> References: <20160823061512.13024-1-ericbavier@openmailbox.org> <20160823061512.13024-4-ericbavier@openmailbox.org> <20160823205059.GB23118@jasmine> <20160823174127.46a77d57@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49251) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcLT1-0003PE-7L for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:50:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcLSx-0000nI-AA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:50:51 -0400 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:33014) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcLSv-0000lP-UT for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:50:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160823174127.46a77d57@openmailbox.org> 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: Eric Bavier Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 05:41:27PM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote: > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 16:50:59 -0400 > Leo Famulari wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 01:15:12AM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote: > > > + (inputs ;users should install their preferred pinentry-* > > > + `(("zsh" ,zsh) > > > > Does it really need the zsh shell? > > Yes, "bin/tomb" is a Zsh script. Wow, interesting. I will read it (not as part of patch review). > > > > > > + #:tests? #f ;requires root > > > > Too bad :/ A program like this should be tested. > > I've tested most functionality manually. But there is no way to get > root in the build environment. There may be some sanity tests that > could be performed in a custom 'check phase, checks that don't need > root. Yes, there may be. I don't think it's a blocker, however.