| Message ID | CAJ3okZ3xqX=E8=i9Yhw01HYzx5Ry8irLOT2z=j2ryonnoL=h4Q@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#38678] Command line option in addition to GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH - Reason? | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cbaines/applying patch | fail | Apply failed |
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes: > What mess did you do Pierre? :-) > > Why are you the author of ee9a735bc8 [1]? > Why there are lines modified in guix.texi 21f4fbdd84 [2] which are not > in the original patch [3]? I just fixed the conflict of the copyright line because it got updated in the meantime. That's it :) I'm the committer of the patch, not the author though.
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes: > What mess did you do Pierre? :-) > > Why are you the author of ee9a735bc8 [1]? Good question :( My apologies, it seems that when I resolve the conflict your authorship was lost in the process. Sorry about that. > Why there are lines modified in guix.texi 21f4fbdd84 [2] which are not > in the original patch [3]? Hmmm... Looks like Emacs' ws-buttler had a hickup here. I don't know why, sorry about that.
And I've merged your last patch. Thanks!
On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> wrote: > > Why are you the author of ee9a735bc8 [1]? > > Good question :( My apologies, it seems that when I resolve the > conflict your authorship was lost in the process. Sorry about that. You owe me a beer at Guix Days 1. ;-) > > Why there are lines modified in guix.texi 21f4fbdd84 [2] which are not > > in the original patch [3]? > > Hmmm... Looks like Emacs' ws-buttler had a hickup here. I don't know > why, sorry about that. Well, you owe me a beer at Guix Days 2. ;-) Yes, extra spaces had been introduced by these commits: 21531add320 83db0205060 The good point is now, it is fixed. ;-) What I do not understand is: why 'ws-buttler' had a hiccup? Did you modify my patch? I mean ws-buttler generally works by hooking (before-save-hook), therefore to have a hiccup, 'ws-buttler' needed a modification then a save, right? Why? Thank you for reviewing and pushing. I will remind that you owe me 2 belgian beers. ;-) Cheers, simon
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes: > What I do not understand is: why 'ws-buttler' had a hiccup? Did you > modify my patch? I mean ws-buttler generally works by hooking > (before-save-hook), therefore to have a hiccup, 'ws-buttler' needed a > modification then a save, right? Why? I think this happened when I resolved the conflict (with Ediff). > Thank you for reviewing and pushing. > I will remind that you owe me 2 belgian beers. ;-) Stella Artois? :D
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 19:12, Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> wrote: > > zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes: > > > What I do not understand is: why 'ws-buttler' had a hiccup? Did you > > modify my patch? I mean ws-buttler generally works by hooking > > (before-save-hook), therefore to have a hiccup, 'ws-buttler' needed a > > modification then a save, right? Why? > > I think this happened when I resolved the conflict (with Ediff). You have not resolved a conflict for this one. It was for the previous one. That's why I do not understand. But it does not matter. Only the beers you owe me matter ;-) Cheer, simon
From 8dfcf205f023b609117f3da9007e830df406357b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 18:30:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] refresh: Fix internal variable name. * guix/scripts/refresh.scm (%option): Fix internal variable name. --- guix/scripts/refresh.scm | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/guix/scripts/refresh.scm b/guix/scripts/refresh.scm index bc8e906054..efada1df5a 100644 --- a/guix/scripts/refresh.scm +++ b/guix/scripts/refresh.scm @@ -120,16 +120,16 @@ ;; The short option -L is already used by --list-updaters, therefore ;; it needs to be removed from %standard-build-options. - (let ((%load-path-option (find (lambda (option) + (let ((load-path-option (find (lambda (option) (member "load-path" (option-names option))) %standard-build-options))) (option (filter (lambda (name) (not (equal? #\L name))) - (option-names %load-path-option)) - (option-required-arg? %load-path-option) - (option-optional-arg? %load-path-option) - (option-processor %load-path-option))) + (option-names load-path-option)) + (option-required-arg? load-path-option) + (option-optional-arg? load-path-option) + (option-processor load-path-option))) (option '(#\h "help") #f #f (lambda args -- 2.23.0