[PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]

I created a new inherit for this, maybe this is too cautious, but
just in case as I did not have any more time than version bump +
test build, here is the patch for the new version.


[-- Attachment #2: 0001-gnu-libgcrypt-Update-to-1.7.0.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1466 bytes --]

From 9222453334b4a5136a746076b69f5e1a6e30b3c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 23:04:46 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libgcrypt: Update to 1.7.0.

* gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (libgcrypt-1.7): Update to 1.7.0 through new variable.
Kindly reported by a person on psyced.org
---
 gnu/packages/gnupg.scm | 13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
index b6c1233..39c5765 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 ;;; Copyright © 2015 Paul van der Walt <paul@denknerd.org>
 ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
 ;;; Copyright © 2016 Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
+;;; Copyright © 2016 Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
 ;;;
 ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
 ;;;
@@ -117,6 +118,18 @@ generation.")
        (base32
         "0czvqxkzd5y872ipy6s010ifwdwv29sqbnqc4pf56sd486gqvy6m"))))))
 
+(define-public libgcrypt-1.7
+  (package (inherit libgcrypt)
+    (version "1.7.0")
+    (source
+     (origin
+      (method url-fetch)
+      (uri (string-append "mirror://gnupg/libgcrypt/libgcrypt-"
+                          version ".tar.bz2"))
+      (sha256
+       (base32
+        "14pspxwrqcgfklw3dgmywbxqwdzcym7fznfrqh9rk4vl8jkpxrmh"))))))
+
 (define-public libassuan
   (package
     (name "libassuan")
-- 
2.7.3


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 9 bytes --]


-- 
ng0

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Alex Kost]

ng0 (2016-04-17 00:15 +0300) wrote:

> I created a new inherit for this, maybe this is too cautious, but
> just in case as I did not have any more time than version bump +
> test build, here is the patch for the new version.

I don't know if 'libgcrypt-1.7' package really needed.  Maybe it's
better to make an update of 'libgcrypt' package and to push it to
'core-updates'.

> From 9222453334b4a5136a746076b69f5e1a6e30b3c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
> Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 23:04:46 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libgcrypt: Update to 1.7.0.
>
> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (libgcrypt-1.7): Update to 1.7.0 through new variable.
> Kindly reported by a person on psyced.org
> ---
>  gnu/packages/gnupg.scm | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
> index b6c1233..39c5765 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  ;;; Copyright © 2015 Paul van der Walt <paul@denknerd.org>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
> +;;; Copyright © 2016 Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>

Sorry, are you going to use this email as well?  And will it be your
main one?  If so, we should update ".mailmap" file.

>  ;;;
>  ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
>  ;;;
> @@ -117,6 +118,18 @@ generation.")
>         (base32
>          "0czvqxkzd5y872ipy6s010ifwdwv29sqbnqc4pf56sd486gqvy6m"))))))
>  
> +(define-public libgcrypt-1.7
> +  (package (inherit libgcrypt)
> +    (version "1.7.0")
> +    (source
> +     (origin
> +      (method url-fetch)
> +      (uri (string-append "mirror://gnupg/libgcrypt/libgcrypt-"
> +                          version ".tar.bz2"))
> +      (sha256
> +       (base32
> +        "14pspxwrqcgfklw3dgmywbxqwdzcym7fznfrqh9rk4vl8jkpxrmh"))))))
> +
>  (define-public libassuan
>    (package
>      (name "libassuan")
> -- 
>
> 2.7.3

-- 
Alex

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> writes:

> I don't know if 'libgcrypt-1.7' package really needed.  Maybe it's
> better to make an update of 'libgcrypt' package and to push it to
> 'core-updates'.

I agree, patch for libgcrypt incoming in the next 20 minutes.

>>  ;;; Copyright © 2015 Paul van der Walt <paul@denknerd.org>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
>>  ;;; Copyright © 2016 Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
>> +;;; Copyright © 2016 Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
>
> Sorry, are you going to use this email as well?  And will it be your
> main one?  If so, we should update ".mailmap" file.

Yes it is my main one, I only had a temporary problem to resolve
with this domain.

-- 
ng0

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 26 bytes --]

Updated libgcrypt patch.


[-- Attachment #2: 0001-gnu-libgcrypt-Update-to-1.7.0.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1516 bytes --]

From 6683e71c355e05e4dbcd0dbdf4507c73346c4aed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 11:49:16 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libgcrypt: Update to 1.7.0.

* gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (libgcrypt): Update to 1.7.0.
---
 gnu/packages/gnupg.scm | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
index b6c1233..e1be554 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 ;;; Copyright © 2015 Paul van der Walt <paul@denknerd.org>
 ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
 ;;; Copyright © 2016 Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
+;;; Copyright © 2016 Nils Gillmann <ng0@libertad.pw>
 ;;;
 ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
 ;;;
@@ -72,14 +73,14 @@ Daemon and possibly more in the future.")
 (define-public libgcrypt
   (package
     (name "libgcrypt")
-    (version "1.6.5")
+    (version "1.7.0")
     (source (origin
              (method url-fetch)
              (uri (string-append "mirror://gnupg/libgcrypt/libgcrypt-"
                                  version ".tar.bz2"))
              (sha256
               (base32
-               "0959mwfzsxhallxdqlw359xg180ll2skxwyy35qawmfl89cbr7pl"))))
+               "14pspxwrqcgfklw3dgmywbxqwdzcym7fznfrqh9rk4vl8jkpxrmh"))))
     (build-system gnu-build-system)
     (propagated-inputs
      `(("libgpg-error-host" ,libgpg-error)))
-- 
2.7.3


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 9 bytes --]


-- 
ng0

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Leo Famulari]

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 11:15:25PM +0200, ng0 wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libgcrypt: Update to 1.7.0.

Here are what I think are the salient parts of the release announcement
[0].

1.7.0 is a new stable version of libgcrypt.

1.7.0 is API and ABI compatible with 1.6. There are no changed or
deleted interfaces. All the interface changes are from the addition of
new interfaces.

The 1.6 series will "enter end-of-life state on 2017-06-30.

Regardless of whether we replace 1.6 or create a new package, any
changes to libgcrypt should go to core-updates:

$ guix refresh -l libgcrypt
Building the following 706 packages would ensure 1999 dependent packages are rebuilt [...]
$ guix refresh -l libgcrypt@1.5
Building the following 363 packages would ensure 875 dependent packages are rebuilt [...]

[0]
https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2016q2/000386.html

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:

> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 11:15:25PM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libgcrypt: Update to 1.7.0.
>
> Here are what I think are the salient parts of the release announcement
> [0].
>
> 1.7.0 is a new stable version of libgcrypt.
>
> 1.7.0 is API and ABI compatible with 1.6. There are no changed or
> deleted interfaces. All the interface changes are from the addition of
> new interfaces.
>
> The 1.6 series will "enter end-of-life state on 2017-06-30.
>
> Regardless of whether we replace 1.6 or create a new package, any
> changes to libgcrypt should go to core-updates:
>
> $ guix refresh -l libgcrypt
> Building the following 706 packages would ensure 1999 dependent packages are rebuilt [...]
> $ guix refresh -l libgcrypt@1.5
> Building the following 363 packages would ensure 875 dependent packages are rebuilt [...]
>
> [0]
> https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2016q2/000386.html

Hi, thanks for your additional input.
I already reconsidered this and updated it.
It seems like I need to change the subject if I update patches:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-04/msg00681.html

thanks,
-- 
ng0

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Leo Famulari]

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
> Updated libgcrypt patch.

Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
core-updates?

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Alex Kost]

Leo Famulari (2016-04-18 23:32 +0300) wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>> Updated libgcrypt patch.
>
> Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
> core-updates?

I think this is the right thing to do, but I would wait for a more
authoritative opinion (Ludovic, Mark or Andreas).

-- 
Alex

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> writes:

> Leo Famulari (2016-04-18 23:32 +0300) wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>>> Updated libgcrypt patch.
>>
>> Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
>> core-updates?
>
> I think this is the right thing to do, but I would wait for a more
> authoritative opinion (Ludovic, Mark or Andreas).

Okay, so both patches are applicable we just have to wait on
another persons opinion on which one to apply.

-- 
♥Ⓐ ng0

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Ludovic Courtès]

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>> Updated libgcrypt patch.
>
> Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
> core-updates?

OK for doing it in ‘core-updates’!

In an ideal world, we’d do it in a separate branch to check for
breakage, but currently we lack the computational resources to do so.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Leo Famulari]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:03:40PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> 
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
> >> Updated libgcrypt patch.
> >
> > Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
> > core-updates?
> 
> OK for doing it in ‘core-updates’!

Done in 81068f178.

> In an ideal world, we’d do it in a separate branch to check for
> breakage, but currently we lack the computational resources to do so.

I'm going to build a new system with some changes to core packages. I
could test this change as well. Are there any libgcrypt-dependent
packages I should pay particular attention to?

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Ludovic Courtès]

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:03:40PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
>> 
>> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>> >> Updated libgcrypt patch.
>> >
>> > Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
>> > core-updates?
>> 
>> OK for doing it in ‘core-updates’!
>
> Done in 81068f178.
>
>> In an ideal world, we’d do it in a separate branch to check for
>> breakage, but currently we lack the computational resources to do so.
>
> I'm going to build a new system with some changes to core packages. I
> could test this change as well. Are there any libgcrypt-dependent
> packages I should pay particular attention to?

Not particularly.  This new version is API- and ABI-compatible, so I’m
rather confident.

Ludo’.

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1733 bytes --]

On 2016-04-24(04:23:22+0200), Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:03:40PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> >> 
> >> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
> >> >> Updated libgcrypt patch.
> >> >
> >> > Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
> >> > core-updates?
> >> 
> >> OK for doing it in ‘core-updates’!
> >
> > Done in 81068f178.
> >
> >> In an ideal world, we’d do it in a separate branch to check for
> >> breakage, but currently we lack the computational resources to do so.
> >
> > I'm going to build a new system with some changes to core packages. I
> > could test this change as well. Are there any libgcrypt-dependent
> > packages I should pay particular attention to?
> 
> Not particularly.  This new version is API- and ABI-compatible, so I’m
> rather confident.
> 
> Ludo’.

So I am not sure if this is libgcrypt-1.7 related, I am still debugging
this and will ask on gnunet-dev and proxy-maint-gentoo about this later,
but there's a slight chance that gnunet-gtk breaks with libgcrypt-1.7[1].
It might of course be the ebuild rewrite causing this, that's what I'm
trying to find out.
Just a heads up and notice on why nothing happened with the guix
packages of gnunet, I'm stuck with debugging the last 1% before gnunet
suite gets into portage.

I hope this is not libgcrypt-1.7 related, but if it is, I'll adjust all
packages accordingly until gnunet is patched to this.

[1]: http://www.n0.is/static/pub/p/gnunet/debug/ and
    http://far37qbrwiredyo5.onion/static/pub/p/gnunet/debug/
-- 
♥Ⓐ ng0

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[ng0]

On 2016-05-11(12:50:04PM+0000), ng0 wrote:
> On 2016-04-24(04:23:22+0200), Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:03:40PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > >> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> > >> 
> > >> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:53:51AM +0200, ng0 wrote:
> > >> >> Updated libgcrypt patch.
> > >> >
> > >> > Is there a consensus on upgrading from 1.6.5 and making the change on
> > >> > core-updates?
> > >> 
> > >> OK for doing it in ‘core-updates’!
> > >
> > > Done in 81068f178.
> > >
> > >> In an ideal world, we’d do it in a separate branch to check for
> > >> breakage, but currently we lack the computational resources to do so.
> > >
> > > I'm going to build a new system with some changes to core packages. I
> > > could test this change as well. Are there any libgcrypt-dependent
> > > packages I should pay particular attention to?
> > 
> > Not particularly.  This new version is API- and ABI-compatible, so I’m
> > rather confident.
> > 
> > Ludo’.
> 
> So I am not sure if this is libgcrypt-1.7 related, I am still debugging
> this and will ask on gnunet-dev and proxy-maint-gentoo about this later,
> but there's a slight chance that gnunet-gtk breaks with libgcrypt-1.7[1].
> It might of course be the ebuild rewrite causing this, that's what I'm
> trying to find out.
> Just a heads up and notice on why nothing happened with the guix
> packages of gnunet, I'm stuck with debugging the last 1% before gnunet
> suite gets into portage.
> 
> I hope this is not libgcrypt-1.7 related, but if it is, I'll adjust all
> packages accordingly until gnunet is patched to this.
> 
> [1]: http://www.n0.is/static/pub/p/gnunet/debug/ and
>     http://far37qbrwiredyo5.onion/static/pub/p/gnunet/debug/

I guess It is safe to say that libgcrypt-1.7 does not break gnunet-gtk
functionality, it has to be everything else I am looking at but not
libgcrypt, error introduced itself on a new build system with
libgcrypt-1.6.5

-- 
♥Ⓐ ng0
4096R/13212A27975AF07677A29F7002A296150C201823

Re: [PATCH] version bump libgcrypt -> 1.7

[Leo Famulari]

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 11:54:30PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
> I guess It is safe to say that libgcrypt-1.7 does not break gnunet-gtk
> functionality, it has to be everything else I am looking at but not
> libgcrypt, error introduced itself on a new build system with
> libgcrypt-1.6.5

That's good to know. Thanks for testing!