From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Danckaert Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd.,Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:55:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <20170126.155536.1839657954470559729.post@thomasdanckaert.be> References: <20170126.114344.1410720596142137093.post@thomasdanckaert.be> <20170126.114344.1410720596142137093.post@thomasdanckaert.be> <46c3ce0a-22fd-5235-2c52-9ee7c3f8aa2b@tobias.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54450) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWlSu-0000vM-CF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:56:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWlSp-0000oL-La for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:55:56 -0500 Received: from s02-out.spamexperts.axc.nl ([159.253.1.2]:42955 helo=s02.spamexperts.axc.nl) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cWlSp-0000o4-EK for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:55:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <46c3ce0a-22fd-5235-2c52-9ee7c3f8aa2b@tobias.gr> 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: me@tobias.gr Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd.,Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:58:53 +0100 > [...] >> + (file-name (string-append name "-" version)) > > file-name is used mainly to avoid polluting the store with > meaningless > (tobias.gr/download.php?foo=123) or misleading file names. > > It shouldn't be needed here, and would require its own ".tar.gz" > suffix > otherwise. Ah yes, for some reason I thought we insisted the file would conform to the version number as written here (i.e. "." instead of "-" as a separator), and then forgot about the suffix... > Would the simpler (and more idiomatic) > > #:tests? #f ... ; no tests > > work? totally! >> + (license (l:non-copyleft "file://COPYRIGHT")))) > > Interesting licence. :-) Against my intuition, it appears to be > FSDG-compatible[0]. Yes, feels like this license can cause more confusion than it manages to avoid (which is ostensibly the purpose) :-) Thomas