unofficial mirror of bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
@ 2016-01-23  0:48 Mark Oteiza
  2016-05-15  7:03 ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mark Oteiza @ 2016-01-23  0:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 22440


From -Q:

(package-initialize)
(setq package-check-signature t)
M-x package-import-keyring RET /path/to/package-keyring.gpg RET
M-x list-packages RET

Attempt to install a package; in this case, debbugs:

  Unsigned file ‘async-1.6.tar’ at http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/

In GNU Emacs 25.1.50.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, X toolkit, cairo version 1.14.6, Xaw scroll bars)
 of 2016-01-22 built on logos
Repository revision: 9b2375008348da99b5ec414cd3ca8c4669a12576
Configured using:
 'configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --libexecdir=/usr/lib
 --localstatedir=/var --without-gconf --without-imagemagick --with-cairo
 --with-modules --with-x-toolkit=lucid 'CFLAGS=-march=x86-64
 -mtune=generic -O0 -pipe -fstack-protector-strong
 --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -g -fvar-tracking-assignments -g
 -fvar-tracking-assignments'
 LDFLAGS=-Wl,-O0,--sort-common,--as-needed,-z,relro'

Configured features:
XPM JPEG TIFF GIF PNG RSVG CAIRO SOUND GPM DBUS GSETTINGS NOTIFY ACL
GNUTLS LIBXML2 FREETYPE M17N_FLT LIBOTF XFT ZLIB TOOLKIT_SCROLL_BARS
LUCID X11 MODULES

Important settings:
  value of $LC_COLLATE: C
  value of $LANG: en_US.UTF-8
  locale-coding-system: utf-8-unix






^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-01-23  0:48 bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t Mark Oteiza
@ 2016-05-15  7:03 ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-15 11:32   ` Dmitry Gutov
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggert @ 2016-05-15  7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440

Sorry, I don't see a bug here <http://bugs.gnu.org/22440>.

package-check-signature t means check package signatures when installing, and do
not install a package if it is unsigned. Which is what is happening, right?





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-15  7:03 ` Paul Eggert
@ 2016-05-15 11:32   ` Dmitry Gutov
  2016-05-15 16:50     ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry Gutov @ 2016-05-15 11:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440

On 05/15/2016 10:03 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:

> package-check-signature t means check package signatures when installing, and do
> not install a package if it is unsigned. Which is what is happening, right?

Aren't packages coming from GNU ELPA supposed to all be signed?





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-15 11:32   ` Dmitry Gutov
@ 2016-05-15 16:50     ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-16 10:59       ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-19  4:39       ` Lizzie Dixon
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggert @ 2016-05-15 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dmitry Gutov, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440, Artur Malabarba

Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 05/15/2016 10:03 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> 
>> package-check-signature t means check package signatures when installing, and do
>> not install a package if it is unsigned. Which is what is happening, right?
> 
> Aren't packages coming from GNU ELPA supposed to all be signed?

Sorry, I don't know. I don't even know how to determine whether that particular
package is signed. I know little about packages and am just trying to get this
blocking bug fixed.

It would be helpful if someone could look into this who knows about packages.
I'll CC: this to Artur, who I hope fills the bill. Artur, could you please look
at Bug#22440, or let us know who we should ask about this? Thanks.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-15 16:50     ` Paul Eggert
@ 2016-05-16 10:59       ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-19  4:39       ` Lizzie Dixon
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-16 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert, Dmitry Gutov, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 865 bytes --]

I'll look into it tonight.
Thanks for ccing me.

On Sun, 15 May 2016 1:50 pm Paul Eggert, <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> > On 05/15/2016 10:03 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> >
> >> package-check-signature t means check package signatures when
> installing, and do
> >> not install a package if it is unsigned. Which is what is happening,
> right?
> >
> > Aren't packages coming from GNU ELPA supposed to all be signed?
>
> Sorry, I don't know. I don't even know how to determine whether that
> particular
> package is signed. I know little about packages and am just trying to get
> this
> blocking bug fixed.
>
> It would be helpful if someone could look into this who knows about
> packages.
> I'll CC: this to Artur, who I hope fills the bill. Artur, could you please
> look
> at Bug#22440, or let us know who we should ask about this? Thanks.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1186 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-16 10:59       ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 16:29           ` Mark Oteiza
                             ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert, Dmitry Gutov, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 239 bytes --]

I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?

Also, I believe the import-keyring step is unnecessary. Emacs already uses
the package-keyring file that ships with it.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 299 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 16:29           ` Mark Oteiza
  2016-05-18 16:36           ` Dmitry Gutov
  2016-05-18 19:43           ` Artur Malabarba
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mark Oteiza @ 2016-05-18 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artur Malabarba; +Cc: 22440, Dmitry Gutov, Paul Eggert

On 18/05/16 at 01:50pm, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
> Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?

It appears to have been fixed. No idea what fixed it.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 16:29           ` Mark Oteiza
@ 2016-05-18 16:36           ` Dmitry Gutov
  2016-05-18 16:44             ` Mark Oteiza
  2016-05-18 19:43           ` Artur Malabarba
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry Gutov @ 2016-05-18 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artur Malabarba, Paul Eggert, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440

On 05/18/2016 04:50 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
> Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?

I've just tried (setq package-check-signature t), and then installing 
async 1.6, and the problem was there.

Not the most recent Emacs, though (revision 1a5a05c).





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 16:36           ` Dmitry Gutov
@ 2016-05-18 16:44             ` Mark Oteiza
  2016-05-18 18:10               ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Mark Oteiza @ 2016-05-18 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dmitry Gutov; +Cc: 22440, Artur Malabarba, Paul Eggert

On 18/05/16 at 07:36pm, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 05/18/2016 04:50 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> > I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
> > Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?
> 
> I've just tried (setq package-check-signature t), and then installing async
> 1.6, and the problem was there.
> 
> Not the most recent Emacs, though (revision 1a5a05c).

Mine is a little older, and I must retract my previous email. Apparently
after doing M-x list-packages, package-check-signature is
allow-unsigned again, not t.  I have to (setq package-check-signature t)
after list-packages now.

The issue persists. FWIW my version is 2eb6817





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 16:44             ` Mark Oteiza
@ 2016-05-18 18:10               ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-18 18:23                 ` Dmitry Gutov
  2016-05-18 19:24                 ` Artur Malabarba
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggert @ 2016-05-18 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mark Oteiza, Dmitry Gutov; +Cc: 22440, Artur Malabarba

On 05/18/2016 09:44 AM, Mark Oteiza wrote:
> Apparently
> after doing M-x list-packages, package-check-signature is
> allow-unsigned again, not t.

I observed the same thing, but as I have no idea how packages ought to 
work I didn't know whether that was expected. If not, it's a bug too -- 
should it get a different bug report or is this all the same bug?






^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 18:10               ` Paul Eggert
@ 2016-05-18 18:23                 ` Dmitry Gutov
  2016-05-18 19:24                 ` Artur Malabarba
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry Gutov @ 2016-05-18 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert, Mark Oteiza; +Cc: 22440, Artur Malabarba

On 05/18/2016 09:10 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:

> I observed the same thing, but as I have no idea how packages ought to
> work I didn't know whether that was expected. If not, it's a bug too --
> should it get a different bug report or is this all the same bug?

These are related, but orthogonal issues.

The newfound bug is that package-refresh-contents for some reason 
expects that package-check-signature could have only been modified via 
Custom.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 18:10               ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-18 18:23                 ` Dmitry Gutov
@ 2016-05-18 19:24                 ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 19:33                   ` Artur Malabarba
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, ueno, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:

> I observed the same thing, but as I have no idea how packages ought to work I didn't know whether that was expected. If not, it's a bug too -- 
> should it get a different bug report or is this all the same bug?

Yes, it's a bug. Looks like it was introduced by the commit below.
I've CC'd Daiki.

14aec913ac3f0dd408487c0e8327403e0f239964
Author:     Daiki Ueno <ueno@gnu.org>
AuthorDate: Wed Feb 17 16:44:16 2016 +0900

Take advantage of new GnuPG version check function

* lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el (epg-configuration-find): Declare.
(package-refresh-contents): Use `epg-configuration-find' to check if EPG
is usable.

1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el | 15 +++++++++------

modified   lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
@@ -1452,9 +1452,8 @@ package-initialize
 (defvar package--downloads-in-progress nil
   "List of in-progress asynchronous downloads.")
 
-(declare-function epg-check-configuration "epg-config"
-                  (config &optional minimum-version))
-(declare-function epg-configuration "epg-config" ())
+(declare-function epg-configuration-find "epg-config"
+                  (protocol &optional force))
 (declare-function epg-import-keys-from-file "epg" (context keys))
 
 ;;;###autoload
@@ -1554,11 +1553,15 @@ package-refresh-contents
   (let ((default-keyring (expand-file-name "package-keyring.gpg"
                                            data-directory))
         (inhibit-message async))
+    (if (get 'package-check-signature 'saved-value)
+        (when package-check-signature
+          (epg-configuration-find 'OpenPGP))
+      (setq package-check-signature
+            (if (epg-configuration-find 'OpenPGP)
+                'allow-unsigned)))
     (when (and package-check-signature (file-exists-p default-keyring))
       (condition-case-unless-debug error
-          (progn
-            (epg-check-configuration (epg-configuration))
-            (package-import-keyring default-keyring))
+          (package-import-keyring default-keyring)
         (error (message "Cannot import default keyring: %S" (cdr error))))))
   (package--download-and-read-archives async))





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 19:24                 ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 19:33                   ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-19  1:30                     ` Daiki Ueno
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, ueno, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> writes:

> Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:
>
>> I observed the same thing, but as I have no idea how packages ought to work I didn't know whether that was expected. If not, it's a bug too -- 
>> should it get a different bug report or is this all the same bug?
>
> Yes, it's a bug. Looks like it was introduced by the commit below.
> I've CC'd Daiki.

Here's a proposed fix.

---

Author:     Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com>

* lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el (package-refresh-contents):

Don't change the value of `package-check-signature'.
(package-check-signature): Use `epg-find-configuration'
instead of `executable-find'.

1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el | 16 ++++++----------

modified   lisp/emacs-lisp/package.el
@@ -302,10 +302,12 @@ package-directory-list
   :risky t
   :version "24.1")
 
-(defvar epg-gpg-program)
+(declare-function epg-find-configuration "epg-config"
+                  (protocol &optional force))
 
 (defcustom package-check-signature
-  (if (progn (require 'epg-config) (executable-find epg-gpg-program))
+  (if (and (require 'epg-config)
+           (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP))
       'allow-unsigned)
   "Non-nil means to check package signatures when installing.
 The value `allow-unsigned' means to still install a package even if
@@ -1457,8 +1459,6 @@ package-initialize
 (defvar package--downloads-in-progress nil
   "List of in-progress asynchronous downloads.")
 
-(declare-function epg-find-configuration "epg-config"
-                  (protocol &optional force))
 (declare-function epg-import-keys-from-file "epg" (context keys))
 
 ;;;###autoload
@@ -1558,12 +1558,8 @@ package-refresh-contents
   (let ((default-keyring (expand-file-name "package-keyring.gpg"
                                            data-directory))
         (inhibit-message async))
-    (if (get 'package-check-signature 'saved-value)
-        (when package-check-signature
-          (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP))
-      (setq package-check-signature
-            (if (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP)
-                'allow-unsigned)))
+    (when package-check-signature
+      (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP))
     (when (and package-check-signature (file-exists-p default-keyring))
       (condition-case-unless-debug error
           (package-import-keyring default-keyring)





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 16:29           ` Mark Oteiza
  2016-05-18 16:36           ` Dmitry Gutov
@ 2016-05-18 19:43           ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 20:43             ` Artur Malabarba
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> writes:

> I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
> Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?

Given the other information provided on this thread, I can indeed
reproduce this now. I'll look into it.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 19:43           ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 20:43             ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 21:09               ` Artur Malabarba
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 581 bytes --]

How do we run tests for a single file with the new test structure? I use to
call `make package-test` inside the test/automated directory. But I can't
seem to find an equivalent with the new structure.

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:43 PM Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
> > Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?
>
> Given the other information provided on this thread, I can indeed
> reproduce this now. I'll look into it.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 936 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 20:43             ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 21:09               ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-18 22:05                 ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 773 bytes --]

Should now be fixed on the emacs-25 branch. Please test if it works for you
as well.

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:43 PM Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com>
wrote:

> How do we run tests for a single file with the new test structure? I use
> to call `make package-test` inside the test/automated directory. But I
> can't seem to find an equivalent with the new structure.
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:43 PM Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > I couldn't reproduce this, so it might have been fixed already.
>> > Mark, could you check if this has been fixed for you?
>>
>> Given the other information provided on this thread, I can indeed
>> reproduce this now. I'll look into it.
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1367 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 21:09               ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-18 22:05                 ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-18 23:11                   ` Artur Malabarba
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggert @ 2016-05-18 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artur Malabarba; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

On 05/18/2016 02:09 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> Should now be fixed on the emacs-25 branch. Please test if it works 
> for you as well.

When I build emacs-25 now, it issues new warnings like the following. 
What are these warnings symptoms of, and can the problem be avoided?


   ELC      emacs-lisp/package.elc

In package--check-signature:
emacs-lisp/package.el:1248:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
emacs-lisp/package.el:1248:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’

In package--download-one-archive:
emacs-lisp/package.el:1508:39:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
emacs-lisp/package.el:1508:39:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’

In package-install-from-archive:
emacs-lisp/package.el:1806:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
emacs-lisp/package.el:1806:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’

In describe-package-1:
emacs-lisp/package.el:2403:53:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
emacs-lisp/package.el:2403:53:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’






^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 22:05                 ` Paul Eggert
@ 2016-05-18 23:11                   ` Artur Malabarba
  2016-05-19 15:15                     ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread
From: Artur Malabarba @ 2016-05-18 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]

Just an unfortunate consequence of how macroexpand-let works. I've now
fixed them by changing those 2 symbols to a plain let.

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:05 PM Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> On 05/18/2016 02:09 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> > Should now be fixed on the emacs-25 branch. Please test if it works
> > for you as well.
>
> When I build emacs-25 now, it issues new warnings like the following.
> What are these warnings symptoms of, and can the problem be avoided?
>
>
>    ELC      emacs-lisp/package.elc
>
> In package--check-signature:
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1248:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1248:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’
>
> In package--download-one-archive:
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1508:39:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1508:39:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’
>
> In package-install-from-archive:
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1806:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
> emacs-lisp/package.el:1806:36:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’
>
> In describe-package-1:
> emacs-lisp/package.el:2403:53:Warning: reference to free variable ‘url’
> emacs-lisp/package.el:2403:53:Warning: reference to free variable ‘b-sym’
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1638 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 19:33                   ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-19  1:30                     ` Daiki Ueno
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Daiki Ueno @ 2016-05-19  1:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artur Malabarba; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, Paul Eggert, 22440, Dmitry Gutov

Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com> writes:

> Here's a proposed fix.

Thank you for taking a look at this, the patch looks good to me.

>  ;;;###autoload
> @@ -1558,12 +1558,8 @@ package-refresh-contents
>    (let ((default-keyring (expand-file-name "package-keyring.gpg"
>                                             data-directory))
>          (inhibit-message async))
> -    (if (get 'package-check-signature 'saved-value)
> -        (when package-check-signature
> -          (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP))
> -      (setq package-check-signature
> -            (if (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP)
> -                'allow-unsigned)))
> +    (when package-check-signature
> +      (epg-find-configuration 'OpenPGP))

While it was from the original code, I would suggest to check the return
value of `epg-find-configuration' or simply remove this `when' clause.

Regards,
-- 
Daiki Ueno





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-15 16:50     ` Paul Eggert
  2016-05-16 10:59       ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-19  4:39       ` Lizzie Dixon
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Lizzie Dixon @ 2016-05-19  4:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Eggert; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440, Artur Malabarba, Dmitry Gutov

On 05/15, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> > On 05/15/2016 10:03 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > 
> >> package-check-signature t means check package signatures when installing, and do
> >> not install a package if it is unsigned. Which is what is happening, right?
> > 
> > Aren't packages coming from GNU ELPA supposed to all be signed?
> 
> Sorry, I don't know. I don't even know how to determine whether that particular
> package is signed.

You can tell because http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/async-1.9.tar.sig exists.

$ curl -O 'http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/async-1.9.tar'
  % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time  Current
                                 Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed
100 61440  100 61440    0     0  98420      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 98304
$ curl -O 'http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/async-1.9.tar.sig'
  % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time  Current
                                 Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed
100    96  100    96    0     0    254      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--   253
$ gpg --no-default-keyring --keyring /usr/share/emacs/25.0.93/etc/package-keyring.gpg --verify async-1.9.tar.sig 
gpg: assuming signed data in 'async-1.9.tar'
gpg: Signature made Wed 18 May 2016 02:05:02 PM PDT using DSA key ID 7FBDEF9B
gpg: Good signature from "GNU ELPA Signing Agent <elpasign@elpa.gnu.org>" [unknown]
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: CA44 2C00 F917 74F1 7F59  D9B0 474F 0583 7FBD EF9B





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

* bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t
  2016-05-18 23:11                   ` Artur Malabarba
@ 2016-05-19 15:15                     ` Paul Eggert
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggert @ 2016-05-19 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artur Malabarba; +Cc: Mark Oteiza, 22440-done, Dmitry Gutov

On 05/18/2016 04:11 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
> Just an unfortunate consequence of how macroexpand-let works. I've now 
> fixed them by changing those 2 symbols to a plain let.

Thanks for doing all that and for fixing the bug. Closing the bug report.





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2016-05-19 15:15 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-01-23  0:48 bug#22440: 25.1.50; package.el fails to install with package-check-signature t Mark Oteiza
2016-05-15  7:03 ` Paul Eggert
2016-05-15 11:32   ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-05-15 16:50     ` Paul Eggert
2016-05-16 10:59       ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 13:50         ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 16:29           ` Mark Oteiza
2016-05-18 16:36           ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-05-18 16:44             ` Mark Oteiza
2016-05-18 18:10               ` Paul Eggert
2016-05-18 18:23                 ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-05-18 19:24                 ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 19:33                   ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-19  1:30                     ` Daiki Ueno
2016-05-18 19:43           ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 20:43             ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 21:09               ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-18 22:05                 ` Paul Eggert
2016-05-18 23:11                   ` Artur Malabarba
2016-05-19 15:15                     ` Paul Eggert
2016-05-19  4:39       ` Lizzie Dixon

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).