GNU bug report logs - #40382
specifications->manifest reverse package order

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 23:21:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Merged with 43585

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 40382 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

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

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

Report forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#40382; Package guix. (Wed, 01 Apr 2020 23:21:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent to Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guix <at> gnu.org. (Wed, 01 Apr 2020 23:21:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

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

From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: specifications->manifest reverse package order
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 01:20:32 +0200

Hello,

I have a file named packages.scm, which contains the following:

  (specifications->manifest '("a" "b" "c"))

When using

  guix package -m manifest.scm
  guix package -I

packages are listed in the reverse order, i.e., "c", "b", "a".

I expect them to appear in the same order as in the file.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou
Merged 40382 43585. Request was from Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Mon, 16 Jun 2025 11:51:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 5 days ago.

Previous Next

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