From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Gnome-updates Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 15:11:50 +0200 Message-ID: <87potb19ih.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160426173717.GA4754@solar> 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]:43147) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1avPG3-0003Re-HO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:12:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1avPFx-0007AD-JU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:11:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160426173717.GA4754@solar> (Andreas Enge's message of "Tue, 26 Apr 2016 19:37:17 +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: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Andreas Enge skribis: > the gnome-updates branch has built on x86, and compared to master, there = are > not that many regressions: > http://hydra.gnu.org/eval/108921?compare=3Dmaster#tabs-now-fail In fact this slightly overestimates the failures compared to master; in particular, all the Octave/Fltk-related failures are already in master. > I saw a few that seem to be related to fonts and freetype, but I am not > a specialist. Do you think we could nevertheless merge back to master? > In any case, it would be nice if people who are competent in these matters > could have a look at the few remaining build failures. Since =E2=80=98make assert-binaries-available=E2=80=99 passed, I went ahead= and merge the branch. If anything goes wrong, please let us know! Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.