GNU bug report logs - #51192
[PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:24:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 51192 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 51192 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#51192; Package guix-patches. (Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:24:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to guix-patches <at> gnu.org. (Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:24:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 22:23:21 +0200
* doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): In quotation, mention Debian,
Ubuntu, and openSUSE.
---
 doc/guix.texi | 14 ++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)

Hi!

For some users, it might be easier to install via Debian/Ubuntu/openSUSE,
which might also handle the most important bits of “Application Setup”,
so this patch mentions this option.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index 7a4b2c040b..2d23344bcf 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -640,6 +640,20 @@ chmod +x guix-install.sh
 ./guix-install.sh
 @end example
 
+If you're running Debian or a derivative such as Ubuntu, you can instead
+install the package (it might be a version older than @value{VERSION}
+but you can update it afterwards by running @samp{guix pull}):
+
+@example
+sudo apt install guix
+@end example
+
+Likewise on openSUSE:
+
+@example
+sudo zypper install guix
+@end example
+
 When you're done, @pxref{Application Setup} for extra configuration you
 might need, and @ref{Getting Started} for your first steps!
 @end quotation

base-commit: 1628e5d51b9cb1d526b8a55c670f65946fd7c970
-- 
2.33.0





Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#51192; Package guix-patches. (Thu, 02 Dec 2021 14:54:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#51192: [PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 15:53:01 +0100
Hey Ludo,

> For some users, it might be easier to install via Debian/Ubuntu/openSUSE,
> which might also handle the most important bits of “Application Setup”,
> so this patch mentions this option.
>
> Thoughts?

This looks fine to me.

Thanks,

Mathieu




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#51192; Package guix-patches. (Sat, 19 Mar 2022 13:08:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#51192: [PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2022 14:03:06 +0100
Hi,

On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 at 22:23, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): In quotation, mention Debian,
> Ubuntu, and openSUSE.
> ---
>  doc/guix.texi | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)

LGTM.


Cheers,
simon




Information forwarded to guix-patches <at> gnu.org:
bug#51192; Package guix-patches. (Fri, 24 Jun 2022 00:43:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 51192 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#51192: [PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 20:42:44 -0400
Hi,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): In quotation, mention Debian,
> Ubuntu, and openSUSE.
> ---
>  doc/guix.texi | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> Hi!
>
> For some users, it might be easier to install via Debian/Ubuntu/openSUSE,
> which might also handle the most important bits of “Application Setup”,
> so this patch mentions this option.

If you are still convinced this provides value above our existing shell
script, you had 2 LGTM here, so feel free to push or otherwise close it
:-).

Thanks,

Maxim




Reply sent to Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Fri, 24 Jun 2022 21:42:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Fri, 24 Jun 2022 21:42:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #19 received at 51192-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 51192-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#51192: [PATCH] doc: Mention installation via distro packages.
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 23:41:16 +0200
Hi Maxim,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>> * doc/guix.texi (Binary Installation): In quotation, mention Debian,
>> Ubuntu, and openSUSE.
>> ---
>>  doc/guix.texi | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> For some users, it might be easier to install via Debian/Ubuntu/openSUSE,
>> which might also handle the most important bits of “Application Setup”,
>> so this patch mentions this option.
>
> If you are still convinced this provides value above our existing shell
> script, you had 2 LGTM here, so feel free to push or otherwise close it
> :-).

Finally applied, thanks for the heads-up!  :-)

Ludo’.




bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sat, 23 Jul 2022 11:24:12 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 1 year and 248 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.