From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Subject: bug#35551: package gcc does not depend on binutils and glibc
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 10:07:24 +0200
Message-ID: <877eay4ts3.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <1666426.mZ6LCf6Yd0@omega> <87y33i2qv6.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87pnors4r3.fsf@elephly.net> <2986777.FnrGXkQkEc@omega>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56303)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hP0ZX-0000Y9-Sn
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2019 04:08:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hP0ZW-00079O-QY
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2019 04:08:03 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51725)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1hP0ZW-00079C-NF
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2019 04:08:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hP0ZW-0002ap-EA
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2019 04:08:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.35551.D35551.15574756609932@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <2986777.FnrGXkQkEc@omega> (Bruno Haible's message of "Thu, 09
	May 2019 23:57:23 +0200")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
Cc: 35551-done@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Bruno,

Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org> skribis:

>> > Ricardo, I think you had a patch to hide the =E2=80=98gcc=E2=80=99 pac=
kage.  Could you
>> > commit it?
>>=20
>> I=E2=80=99ve just done this.  My apologies for the delay.  Now a search =
for
>> =E2=80=9Cgcc=E2=80=9D only returns =E2=80=9Cgcc-toolchain=E2=80=9D (and =
one =E2=80=9Cgcc-bootstrap=E2=80=9D).
>
> Will it also be hidden from the package list
> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/G/ ?

Yes, when we update it.

> Being a newbie regarding guix, I found it more comfortable to search
> for packages under https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/ rather
> than through some guix command.

Oh, really?

I would hope that =E2=80=98guix search=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98guix package -=
-list-available=E2=80=99 are
easier than anything else, and that people value the idea of doing
things locally.  Also, a local search gives the right result while a
remote service might give results for a different Guix revision.

Is there any specific reason why you were uncomfortable with these
commands?  I=E2=80=99m curious how we could improve the user experience her=
e.

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.