| Message ID | 0b207bae-2f18-eb06-d51b-0f0c92eb6d15@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#40597] doc: Mention update-guix-package in guix-binary tarball, rebuild instructions. | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
| cbaines/git branch | success | View Git branch |
| cbaines/applying patch | fail | View Laminar job |
Hi Vincent, Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> skribis: >>From dd961656d9bd98d11ba5e38be89cd1952fefc263 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 14:25:57 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] doc: Mention update-guix-package in guix-binary tarball > rebuild instructions. > > * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): Mention 'make update-guix-package'. I agree this needs to be documented, but I don’t think this is the right place: “Binary Installation” is for users who want to install. Instead, we should document it in a section explicitly targeting Guix developers, maybe under “Contributing”? Thanks, Ludo’.
On 13/04/2020 15:41, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> skribis: > >> * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): Mention 'make update-guix-package'. > I agree this needs to be documented, but I don’t think this is the right > place: “Binary Installation” is for users who want to install. Instead, > we should document it in a section explicitly targeting Guix developers, > maybe under “Contributing”? OK, I'll see what I can do.
Hi Vincent and Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes: > Hi Vincent, > > Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> skribis: > >>>>From dd961656d9bd98d11ba5e38be89cd1952fefc263 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> >> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 14:25:57 +0200 >> Subject: [PATCH] doc: Mention update-guix-package in guix-binary tarball >> rebuild instructions. >> >> * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): Mention 'make update-guix-package'. > > I agree this needs to be documented, but I don’t think this is the right > place: “Binary Installation” is for users who want to install. Instead, > we should document it in a section explicitly targeting Guix developers, > maybe under “Contributing”? A "Updating the Guix Package" subsection has since been added to the Contributing section, which I believe covers this. Thank you, Closing. Maxim
From dd961656d9bd98d11ba5e38be89cd1952fefc263 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Vincent Legoll <vincent.legoll@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 14:25:57 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] doc: Mention update-guix-package in guix-binary tarball rebuild instructions. * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): Mention 'make update-guix-package'. --- doc/guix.texi | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi index 891e2693f6..8bf4ef9b74 100644 --- a/doc/guix.texi +++ b/doc/guix.texi @@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ Copyright @copyright{} 2020 Jakub Kądziołka@* Copyright @copyright{} 2020 Jack Hill@* Copyright @copyright{} 2020 Naga Malleswari@* Copyright @copyright{} 2020 Brice Waegeneire@* +Copyright @copyright{} 2020 Vincent Legoll@* Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or @@ -736,6 +737,16 @@ guix pack -s @var{system} --localstatedir \ @xref{Invoking guix pack}, for more info on this handy tool. +If you have local modifications you want to include in the resulting +tarball, you have to run the following command in your modified Guix +source tree before doing the above: + +@example +make update-guix-package +git commit -m'NOT_FOR_UPSTREAM:allow testing a modified guix-binary' \ + gnu/packages/package-management.scm +@end example + @node Requirements @section Requirements -- 2.20.1