From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Loyall Subject: bug#35998: Typo on guix blog. ATTN: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 18:43:05 -0500 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35326) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8El-0004Fg-J2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:44:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8Ek-0002gK-Id for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:44:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:46782) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8Ek-0002gD-Fi for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:44:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8Ek-0006re-Cc for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:44:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35191) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8E8-0003w2-Co for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:43:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8E5-0002Ag-73 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:43:22 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::131]:34631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hW8E3-00027v-B6 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2019 19:43:19 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id v18so3500506lfi.1 for ; Wed, 29 May 2019 16:43:17 -0700 (PDT) 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" To: 35998@debbugs.gnu.org Hi. I think there is a typo on this blog post: https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/blog/2019/gnu-guix-1.0.1-released/ The link on the text "The installer can now create Btrfs file systems" points to bug #35716, but I think it was supposed to point to some other one like maybe #35657. Cheers, --sebboh