From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Signed archive export/import
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 00:13:32 +0100
Message-ID: <87bo0bp143.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87bo0bqy7k.fsf@gnu.org> <20131220170412.GA2382@debian>
	<87y53fpfv9.fsf@gnu.org> <20131220181353.GA8623@debian>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41989)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Vu9GK-0004lZ-1F
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:13:50 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Vu9GB-0003RU-0Q
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:13:43 -0500
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:48899)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1Vu9GA-0003RH-QY
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:13:34 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20131220181353.GA8623@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Fri,
	20 Dec 2013 19:13:53 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 06:54:50PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>> Could you post $top_builddir/{pk-cryto,store}.log ?

[...]

> Test begin:
>   test-name: "string->gcry-sexp->string"
> Test end:
>   result-kind: fail
>   actual-value: ("(foo bar)" "\"=C3=80=C3=BF=C3=AE\"" "(genkey \n (rsa \n=
  (nbits \"1024\")\n  )\n )")
>   expected-value: ("(foo bar)" "#C0FFEE#" "(genkey \n (rsa \n  (nbits \"1=
024\")\n  )\n )")

OK, I =E2=80=9Cfixed=E2=80=9D this by commenting out the =E2=80=9C#C0FFEE#=
=E2=80=9D test.

Likewise, commit 0a66781 adjust the =E2=80=9Cgcry-sexp-nth=E2=80=9D test to=
 match (or
rather hide) the semantics change.

Both are harmless for our purposes, AFAICS.

[...]

> Test begin:
>   test-name: "export/import several paths"
> Test end:
>   result-kind: fail
>   actual-value: #f
> Test begin:
>   test-name: "import corrupt path"
> Test end:
>   result-kind: fail
>   actual-value: #f

Did you rebuild =E2=80=98guix-daemon=E2=80=99?  If not, you should.  (I can=
=E2=80=99t reproduce
it locally with Libgcrypt 1.5.3.)

If that=E2=80=99s not enough, could you post relevant info from
=E2=80=98test-suite.log=E2=80=99?

TIA,
Ludo=E2=80=99.