From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH]: gnu: gnurl: Update to 7.50.1. Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:53:26 -0400 Message-ID: <20160815175326.GA17361@jasmine> References: <87h9azqncs.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87y44bclh5.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <20160805154952.GA19656@jasmine> <87eg636vvq.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87invfxels.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87inv3r9nw.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50337) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZM50-00031P-U2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:53:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZM4w-00067s-Q8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:53:41 -0400 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:50198) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZM4t-00065m-Ty for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:53:38 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87inv3r9nw.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: ng0 Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 09:18:11AM +0000, ng0 wrote: > ng0 writes: > > ng0 writes: > >> Leo Famulari writes: > >>> Can you add a comment explaining why test1139 is disabled? Just saying > >>> that it won't work doesn't tell those reading the package why it is > >>> disabled. > >> > >> My assumption: files or lines of code are searched which will not exist > >> in gnurl. If this is not just us (sadly in Gentoo i have test/checks > >> disabled for this package), I will fix this upstream. > >> If your perl knowledge is better look at the failing test yourself. This > >> is my best judgment with the little perl knowledge I have. > >> It was just ruling out what could cause the test failure. > > > > Is this okay? > > Can someone tell me if this is okay or if it needs further changes? > I'd like to update this. Okay, I think it should updated too, considering that gnurl is a cURL fork, and that the latest release of cURL fixed these bugs: CVE-2016-5419: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/adv_20160803A.html CVE-2016-5420: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/adv_20160803B.html CVE-2016-5421: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/adv_20160803C.html Pushed as 5f9d5905745. Will you file a bug report with the gnurl developers about this failing test and reply to this email with a link to the bug report? Ideally, the package update commit would include a link to the upstream bug report about the failing test, but I'm not going to wait for the link to update this. If a Guix package is passing its entire test suite, we should react to new tests failures proactively. That means that we should try to understand the problem, and work with the upstream developers to fix the problem.