From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: [PATCH]: gnu: gnurl: Update to 7.50.1. Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 23:24:37 +0000 Message-ID: <87eg5phayy.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> 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> <20160815175326.GA17361@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZRFN-00070l-BW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:24:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZRFK-0006BO-Si for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:24:44 -0400 Received: from mithlond.libertad.in-berlin.de ([2001:67c:1400:2490::1]:57933 helo=beleriand.n0.is) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZRFK-0006Ax-Et for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:24:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160815175326.GA17361@jasmine> 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: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari writes: > 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. Thanks, > 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? yes I will do so and see who can fix it. > 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. I see, I thought this should just be placed into comments in the package definition. Makes sense to include it in the commit message. > 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. -- ♥Ⓐ ng0 For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org