From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Paul Schmidt Subject: Re: General Question: Execution of binaries not built for GuixSD Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 16:12:06 +0200 Message-ID: <576A9CB6.80508@gmx.net> References: <576A6D73.3070104@gmx.net> <576A925E.20107@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QlKdxsf85Itko3tMA6WqkqCCqaENkP1uS" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49057) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFitC-0006am-SN for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 10:12:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFit6-0002U8-S2 for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 10:12:21 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:50086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bFit6-0002U0-Ht for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 10:12:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" To: "Thompson, David" Cc: help-guix This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --QlKdxsf85Itko3tMA6WqkqCCqaENkP1uS Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="rLUoRrTQ1nVixXkpja9DQCmsN4aETO0FP" From: Florian Paul Schmidt To: "Thompson, David" Cc: help-guix Message-ID: <576A9CB6.80508@gmx.net> Subject: Re: General Question: Execution of binaries not built for GuixSD References: <576A6D73.3070104@gmx.net> <576A925E.20107@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: --rLUoRrTQ1nVixXkpja9DQCmsN4aETO0FP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 06/22/2016 03:53 PM, Thompson, David wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Florian Paul Schmidt > wrote: >> See the attached file for reference. Put it into a guix checkout under= >> >> nonfree/packages/ >> >> Does that help as a starting point? >=20 > Do the upstream Firefox and/or Thunderbird contain nonfree components? > If so, please do not promote such software on this list. >=20 > I really really really cannot recommend this approach to packaging, > because it goes against one of the core properties of Guix: > reproducibility. Taking someone else's binary and hacking it until it > works isn't a real solution. The proper way to do this is to build > binaries from source that are compatible with Guix. I'm answering a technical question, not promoting the use of this software, also I'm fully aware of the caveats you mentioned. I didn't deem it worthy to reiterate them. Even if you do consider it promotion I think it's a far stretch from an email of a participant in a list to the guix project itself promoting these kinds of solutions. Also you can consider this email as a test case for the policies the Guix project has in place :) How you want to deal with it, etc :) Have at it (/me puts on his flame retardant suite)! Regards, Flo --=20 https://fps.io --rLUoRrTQ1nVixXkpja9DQCmsN4aETO0FP-- --QlKdxsf85Itko3tMA6WqkqCCqaENkP1uS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXapy2AAoJEA5f4Coltk8ZxQgH/jEEkRhDOIUccdq8Bk4VfXnj CUU/Q9dcFp0rY3JwkvxSG5I1iFdo1K7HoQKhXFWD0nxy8hnjwJRdeC860WewOUfQ 6GBLhE/mMisLNiCWm7mkYbwHbLCAm+MCCH3DN5OBy24dthwIc3oELRI0yQxOESDB QiBzB1RD/IxHuwqNGXkERj/r+ZuTugTul8o3QhjpRFNPrgd9TQFxGoyttLyQdYmV AXDFxUSkXtUfQQ8NLodUjQq9kVaK/obsTHuERFLTxb1WXK+QQXSJRC25EdV4MqVh umHAR4DmpE2AeuxwMLGQ3f43USsTmtwIcrtFe0ZDtRbdj4/JCyrAqMEC9Na7VFg= =6vcR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QlKdxsf85Itko3tMA6WqkqCCqaENkP1uS--