From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: bug#19764: Downgrade reported as an ugprade Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:18:06 -0500 Message-ID: <87r3u5hcqp.fsf@netris.org> References: <878ugem3zl.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54454) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ2fT-0006vI-HI for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:19:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ2fO-0000mW-Nh for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:19:07 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:42836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ2fO-0000mS-Kk for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:19:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ2fO-0004rc-5x for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:19:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <878ugem3zl.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Wed, 04 Feb 2015 10:15:58 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 19764@debbugs.gnu.org ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > As seen during a =E2=80=98guix package=E2=80=99 demo at FOSDEM, downgrade= s are reported > as upgrades as of 0.8.1. I don't know about this one, but another problem with our upgrade command is that it mishandles outputs other than "out", at least in the console output. It _always_ says it's upgrading them. Mark