rekado

15 ms·

151.
by rekado 4y ago
Guix has package transformations, which lets you use different commits or git URIs for a given package definition. It also doesn't require the definition of a package if all you want is an environment to hack on the code in a git repo.
152.
by rekado 4y ago
My digital bathroom scale doesn't have batteries; it has a big capacitor and a foot-operated push-button that charges it. I tap the button maybe three times and that's enough energy to use it. It was also dirt-cheap.
153.
by rekado 4y ago
You can embed images in info. The Guix manual, for example, has a couple of images that you can see inline in the Emacs info reader.
154.
by rekado 4y ago
I wanted bootstrappable.org to focus on the individual projects (such as Mes, bootstrapping the JDK from C, etc) instead of distro integration. The idea was to avoid the impression that this is a distro project (much as reproducible-builds
155.
by rekado 4y ago
> lazy (not Guix) This is such a weird thing that keeps coming up. Why would the language have to be lazy? Obviously, there are tons of things that are lazily evaluated in Guix, e.g. the whole package graph. Why would Scheme have
156.
by rekado 4y ago
There is no GNU foundation. The reason why there is guix.gnu.org is because we asked the GNU sysadmins to delegate the DNS record to our own server. Any other GNU package can do that, and some have. Guix is certainly not favoured by those
157.
by rekado 4y ago
Guix uses a fork of the daemon. Guix, however, is not a fork of Nix .
158.
by rekado 4y ago
Guix is not a fork of Nix. Guix reuses an earlier version of the Nix daemon .
159.
by rekado 5y ago
"poorly documented" is a new one for me. It's got one of the best manuals out there. A little short on examples maybe, but there's a separate cookbook with tutorials, and lots of blog posts. But maybe I'm just a &
160.
by rekado 5y ago
There are not many people hacking on the Hurd. There are a couple of reasons for this: - Linux exists and the expected benefits of the Hurd (e.g. more fine grain virtualization, userspace drivers, etc) aren't enough to mass-motivate p
161.
by rekado 5y ago
This is not a matter of licensing at all. Nor is it about "GNU tools" being used to create something.
162.
by rekado 5y ago
From "Free as in Freedom", page 151: > At first, Stallman proposed the term > “Lignux” – combining the names Linux and GNU – but the initial > reaction was very negative, and this convinced Stallman to go with &
163.
by rekado 5y ago
glibc = GNU C library, so GNU/glibc/linux would be rather redundant.
164.
by rekado 5y ago
It is not about the components that make up a system. The GNU project started in 1983 with the explicit intent to replace proprietary components of an operating system in order to build a completely free operating system. Can you tell me a
165.
by rekado 5y ago
`guix pack` (with its various options) can produce an archive that you could run after unpacking anywhere.
166.
by rekado 5y ago
I've been using Guix in the real world just fine. If you mean that it doesn't come with the vanilla Linux kernel: just add the nonguix channel and you can install it.
167.
by rekado 5y ago
See the refcard for an overview on the Guix CLI: https://guix.gnu.org/guix-refcard.pdf
168.
by rekado 5y ago
With G-expressions you can splice in computed store values, e.g. the computed output location of a package. I recommend the paper[1] explaining why they exist and what alternatives they replace. [1]: https://hal.inria.fr/ha
169.
by rekado 5y ago
Python from Guix has been extended to respect the GUIX_PYTHONPATH variable. If a module you installed via Guix isn't found in your Python from Guix then that's what I'd check. Guix sets this variable (via the generated etc&
170.
by rekado 5y ago
> "they despise systemd" That's really not true. We just don't use it. The reason is that GNU Shepherd is also written in Guile, so we can extend it with code that's already in Guix, e.g. for containerization of
171.
Guix HPC Activity Report 2021(hpc.guix.info)
1 points by rekado 5y ago|0 comments
172.
by rekado 5y ago
Yes, for pre-built binaries you can't really get around patchelf. For example, that's also how CUDA is packaged for Guix.
173.
by rekado 5y ago
"migrant-infested German metropolis"? WTF is this trash?
174.
by rekado 5y ago
"CUDA" is not a forbidden word. Where does that idea come from? Here: CUDA, CUDA, CUDA! If you go to the official channels and ask about CUDA people like me will likely tell you that CUDA is proprietary software, so we don't
175.
by rekado 5y ago
> Elsewhere you tout that RMS wasn't allowed to remove clang from the package collection as if it were proof of value. Other distributions don't have benevolent dictators trying to remove useful free software for ideological re
176.
by rekado 5y ago
> But don't be surprised when people who don't want to waste time on a political discussion that doesn't effect their lives in any way don't want to put up with it. There are no political discussions about the merits
177.
by rekado 5y ago
The "nonguix" repo has got you covered for all your vanilla Linux needs.
178.
by rekado 5y ago
The default channel of Guix has more than 21,000 packages. Is that what counts as a "low number" these days?
179.
by rekado 5y ago
Wow. Not true. You're not kicked out if you "dare" (how brave!) ask a question about it. You're welcome to chat about it on #nonguix. Is it really that hard to accept that #guix is not #nonguix and that we don't
180.
by rekado 5y ago
We don't use patchelf for any official package definition. We have a package for patchelf, but it's only really useful when you have pre-built binaries that you can't rebuild from source.

More ›