From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62720: 29.0.60; Not easy at all to upgrade :core packages like Eglot Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:04:37 +0000 Message-ID: <87v8hynsbu.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87a5zj2vfo.fsf@gmail.com> <871qkom3fj.fsf@posteo.net> <83mt3b4yfc.fsf@gnu.org> <87edonlsxi.fsf@posteo.net> <83jzyf4vzb.fsf@gnu.org> <871qknllkj.fsf@posteo.net> <83fs934pjf.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn2fk47y.fsf@posteo.net> <83sfd2g2ek.fsf@gnu.org> <875y9yfxrr.fsf@gmail.com> <87y1muefks.fsf@gmail.com> <834jpifizy.fsf@gnu.org> <83y1mue1qi.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfd2e01f.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39360"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 62720@debbugs.gnu.org, rpluim@gmail.com, dmitry@gutov.dev, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Eli Zaretskii , larsi@gnus.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 14 22:05:19 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPfa-000A1r-Q1 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 22:05:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPfN-0002Jg-Ly; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:05:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPfL-0002J1-1c for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:05:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPfK-0002b9-Of for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPfK-0000me-Ch for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:05:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Philip Kaludercic Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62720 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62720-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62720.16815026562928 (code B ref 62720); Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62720) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Apr 2023 20:04:16 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47785 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPea-0000lA-4v for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:04:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:60059) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pnPeY-0000ks-F1 for 62720@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:04:14 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A3B02402B6 for <62720@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 22:04:08 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1681502648; bh=Jb9TT9nYgh8nz1bmUpP+nJr3Y0PfGsRLR2QAaPu7/cQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:From; b=ZbgpW8JHA42u3cs/ClCKHaCHPnHmwldnndLo1GeE/TExl1vk2FOSyg+tt7+f9pKua p7eGEvdQYpN4VB9RZq0cOzZ0AGsH97JbcbGQrqhRSTkWgPUrLe2bGMPnUnvTQ++Mua n4dTjtWsYYrE2Uy4dovDeB6shaWyz7EUAwzf4Bad6djvjKITP4IbWMIlm/uY+EQEVe lqDtFBlGjNARoZ3Axwp+supXmP1aro4HDLs15a6CaIktjQ1ExjVrHNqshp8Nny/rlz QM9TpEZnZcas5qyFQ00ZzRbaYQxo3kH49Tkd/9FPbn3qIOHfYxaFTi9dABtOEJdkmV twVRZum9+ewtQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4PynTM4T0dz9rxP; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 22:04:07 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: ("=?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?="'s message of "Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:46:02 +0100") Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; keydata= mDMEZBBQQhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAHJuofBrfqFh12uQu0Yi7mrl525F28eTmwUDflFNmdui0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEDg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwMFCQHhM4AFCwkI BwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwulikAEA77hloUiSrXgFkUVJhlKBpLCHUjA0 mWZ9j9w5d08+jVwBAK6c4iGP7j+/PhbkxaEKa4V3MzIl7zJkcNNjHCXmvFcEuDgEZBBQQhIKKwYB BAGXVQEFAQEHQI5NLiLRjZy3OfSt1dhCmFyn+fN/QKELUYQetiaoe+MMAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEE Dg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwwFCQHhM4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwukm+wEA8cml4JpK NeAu65rg+auKrPOP6TP/4YWRCTIvuYDm0joBALw98AMz7/qMHvSCeU/hw9PL6u6R2EScxtpKnWof z4oM X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:259976 Archived-At: Jo=C3=A3o T=C3=A1vora writes: >> > Notwithstanding this personal opinion, I underline again that >> > it _is_ possible to craft a simple, emacs-29-safe modification, >> > to the package-install function that is even more cautious to >> > download certain types of things. >> >> Philip presented such a safe modification, and we are in the final >> stages of discussing its details, before it will be installed. So >> yes, it is possible. I might have missed a message, what was the last state here? > As I've explained to Philip, the big drawback of that -- undoubtedly > safe -- modification is that it is not compatible to user's > configurations that have a (use-package 'eglot) or a > (package-install 'eglot) in them. Again: Are we sure about this? After all, the package is installed (which I think is the main thing), it just might not have the most recent version. Calling this "not compatible" seems excessive.