[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: persistent reproducibility ?
From: |
Quiliro |
Subject: |
Re: persistent reproducibility ? |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:05:18 -0500 |
El Thu, 23 Mar 2017 22:39:52 -0700
Chris Marusich <address@hidden> escribió:
> By the way, in case you were wondering, one reason why we don't put
> the sources for every package into the Guix source tree is because
> that would make the Guix source tree prohibitively large. The
> transitive closure of sources for GNU Hello alone weighs in at 1750
> MiB (wow!) when uncompressed. And that's only for those specific
> versions of the source files.
How much space would the sources for every package in compressed
format take?
--
Example of rude top posting:
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I leave quotations after my reply?
Saluton,
Quiliro
0987631031
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, (continued)
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Alex Sassmannshausen, 2017/03/21
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/21
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, zimoun, 2017/03/22
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Ricardo Wurmus, 2017/03/23
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, zimoun, 2017/03/23
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/03/24
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, zimoun, 2017/03/25
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Chris Marusich, 2017/03/24
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?,
Quiliro <=
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Chris Marusich, 2017/03/26
- Re: persistent reproducibility ?, Quiliro, 2017/03/26