From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs-24.5-rc3.tar.xz modified in place Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87r3rsgvm2.fsf@igel.home> References: <87pp7dro0p.fsf@netris.org> <876195oroc.fsf@petton.fr> <83h9sov30b.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1428659473 30323 80.91.229.3 (10 Apr 2015 09:51:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 09:51:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mhw@netris.org, Nicolas Petton , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 10 11:51:02 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YgVaX-00065N-I7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:51:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38318 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YgVaX-0001uQ-3y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 05:51:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45761) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YgVaU-0001uL-Ix for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 05:50:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YgVaQ-0007Ip-UE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 05:50:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]:41689) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YgVaL-0007HF-A9; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 05:50:49 -0400 Original-Received: from frontend01.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.182]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3lNZN75Z7Sz3hkQG; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:47 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (dynscan1.mnet-online.de [192.168.6.68]) by mail.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3lNZN74tpdzvh2M; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnet-online.de Original-Received: from mail.mnet-online.de ([192.168.8.182]) by localhost (dynscan1.mail.m-online.net [192.168.6.68]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zR9AW2748WE5; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:46 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Info: cRHixUe0/ZYw816NNoEXs5nkwbBzpUV9S63IeaC89O73tSuVPffqYJ0yzDp8sur7 Original-Received: from igel.home (ppp-46-244-162-109.dynamic.mnet-online.de [46.244.162.109]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:46 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by igel.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA5FB2C3BDD; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:50:45 +0200 (CEST) X-Yow: The Korean War must have been fun. In-Reply-To: <83h9sov30b.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:47:16 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 212.18.0.9 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:185250 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Nicolas Petton >> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:36:19 +0200 >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> > I've downloaded emacs-24.5-rc3.tar.xz and the corresponding .sig from >> > alpha.gnu.org twice, and they are different. Both are signed by Nicolas >> > Petton's public key (7C207910). See below for the differences. >> > >> > It's bad practice to modify tarball releases without changing the >> > version number. Please don't do it. Among other things, it breaks >> > distributions such as GNU Guix that include cryptographic hashes of all >> > source tarballs. >> >> I'm sorry, that's my fault. > > No, it isn't. There's no fault to begin with. Yes, there is. If a tarball needs to be replaced for whatever reason, it *must* get a new file name. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."