From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: Re: interesting thread Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 18:17:19 +0200 Message-ID: <878tlmqlf4.fsf@gnu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57126) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDYym-0001mb-KH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 12:17:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dDYyj-000551-BB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 May 2017 12:17:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: (catonano@gmail.com's message of "Wed, 24 May 2017 17:57:07 +0200") 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: Catonano Cc: guix-devel Catonano writes: > no comments ? I saw this message, had a quick look and a frown... > I was so enthsiast of aving discovered this Can you summarize what's to get enthousiastic about? > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2017May/0005.html >=20=20=20=20 > they published the metadata about the WHOLE collection of packaged in= npm !! Having looked into npm and worked on the guix npm importer, I found that even the some of the most trivial packages cannot be built from source. Cyclic dependencies in the build systems. So after having tried to get npm into GuixSD, I'm at the point of giving up on npm and am planning to migrate away from it. I can hardly imagine...but does this report in any way hint that some packages can be built from source and how to do that? Greetings, janneke --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.com