* 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 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
2016-05-18 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 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
* 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
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 external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.