From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kei Kebreau Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add nethack. Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:47:41 -0500 Message-ID: <87lguxgkci.fsf@openmailbox.org> References: <20160531175630.0bfd76ff@openmailbox.org> <87y46kwt82.fsf@gnu.org> <20160606162541.5254ed6c@openmailbox.org> <20160607172028.GA19231@jasmine> <87fusnj0p4.fsf@gnu.org> <20160608140532.5500b9bc@openmailbox.org> <20160608204436.GA10155@jasmine> <20160608211740.5cb7979b@openmailbox.org> <87bmvt6r5k.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51501) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cN51z-0002xO-Bw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:48:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cN51w-0004d8-9r for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:48:07 -0500 Received: from smtp29.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.63]:37120 helo=smtp14.openmailbox.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cN51v-0004d4-Vc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:48:04 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87bmvt6r5k.fsf@gmail.com> (Chris Marusich's message of "Fri, 30 Dec 2016 13:30:47 -0800") 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: Chris Marusich Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Chris Marusich writes: > Hi Kei, > > I felt the need to play a game, so I was looking into packaging Nethack. > But I then found this email thread and saw that you already tried it! > Inspired by the RPG theme, I decided to perform thread necromancy! :-) > > How did this pan out? It looks like Nethack didn't wind up in the Guix > git repo. Was there a blocking issue? The plan to create a ~/.nethack > directory sounds like a good idea. > Creating the ~/.nethack directory does in fact work, but the last NetHack patch in that thread messes with the user's home directory as part of the installation process, which is forbidden for official Guix packages. The correct fix for this would be to patch NetHack's source code so that writing to files in the store (this is why I used the ~/.nethack directory workaround) would be unnecessary. > Kei Kebreau writes: > >> I haven't asked NetHack maintainers for advice yet. It seems like that >> would be the next logical step, though. > > Did you ever talk with them about the issues you found? I emailed them but never received a response. P.S. I've been pondering on the patch for a while now, and IIRC Chris Webber had a WIP angband patch on the mailing list as well. Help with either package would be well appreciated! :-) --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEg7ZwOtzKO2lLzi2m5qXuPBlGeg0FAlhm1f0ACgkQ5qXuPBlG eg3iCRAAsaW6QaisGTi9gToCeSs29bvzKcX1kQMaCEZVuMqWslBe2HTgckPRcAF0 f/keulgdO52pLoX6yK10NW+t547wATlFhV4CVA3vcUr5BmhVTG9j8gGwTWcWYIYq v4S+HAhLuNfM32FVsj6f5HGT9pgGUF1hChVnkmjZ9GS+WBL8si162UJYLNCoi2xM OXcL380RV+miCI4rk090Xwk3VYzFcCY7AlfMwiaeLaHziuWNv1WNq5EBjdZM3BPU iCAbYJcfuYH2civCZjNNyszCOTqmmklQcJO4qVcC5eRKg636UUXUJ5BEZa0pvtJq aqNLWdAqvf8eCnygeI0hbs51eS1uLt+bRkNs63Pbx6xb5PgEny9grJCGtHyA3k9M lhv1+i043dvRkk6T6eBDICNouTokePUfLyavFMPG2g1yzvlTND5sgHXAdBULxryc o805EQtM0kbveJ/KAE7NIrjuBBv9McZnIXAiGQ8sD11rMUrdKgOLMgGFwvG3ozL5 0g94XtR6S+jon4fYk85MFfR50OdkNI4jise9OOodji/MQ1x0+eSHB9z0XsQe1ONQ aVLiwyYsjmBRzw6P+B37ndJXNAHeuVoex2gk8/NylaR0do1wrOzCpKrQpybMCUWZ wRQU7/dWvoyci8q8kD0BJM22+A0ar1ali9Toz3RtCqj9VrUCbps= =k7kl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--