[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSoC NPM
From: |
Thompson, David |
Subject: |
Re: GSoC NPM |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Sep 2016 11:48:04 -0400 |
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> wrote:
> * add --binary option to importer, sets (arguments (#:binary? #t))
This violates a core principle of Guix: reproducible builds. I don't
support patches that encourage using pre-built binaries.
> As a first attempt, I tried to recursively import `q', a fairly basic
> package from my possibly ignorant perspective: can you write anything
> non-trivial in node without using q?. When that resulted in over 6004
> dependencies (using build systems grunt, gulp and node-gyp, listing 582
> errors), I was pretty sure there was a problem with your importer.
> Using the --binary option, q has no dependencies. None. Single
> package. Hmm.
That's because the thing on npm has already been built for you. q
*does* have dependencies if you want to build it from source, which is
what we should all be striving for.
- Dave
- Re: GSoC NPM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2016/09/02
- Re: GSoC NPM, Thompson, David, 2016/09/02
- Re: GSoC NPM, Jelle Licht, 2016/09/02
- Re: GSoC NPM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2016/09/04
- Re: GSoC NPM,
Thompson, David <=
- NPM and trusted binaries, Pjotr Prins, 2016/09/06
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/09/07
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2016/09/07
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Pjotr Prins, 2016/09/08
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Jelle Licht, 2016/09/08
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Mike Gerwitz, 2016/09/07
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2016/09/08
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Mike Gerwitz, 2016/09/08
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2016/09/08
- Re: NPM and trusted binaries, Mike Gerwitz, 2016/09/08