From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55255)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ioSxG-0001gg-TN
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:02:07 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ioSxF-0003iH-Tz
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:02:02 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39348)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1ioSxF-0003iB-Qa
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:02:01 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ioSxF-0005Z1-Nr
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:02:01 -0500
Subject: [bug#38965] [PATCH 00/12] gnu: coq: Update to 8.10.2.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.38965.B.157831927621291@debbugs.gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54850)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <julien@lepiller.eu>) id 1ioSwL-0001dR-3Z
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:01:10 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <julien@lepiller.eu>) id 1ioSwF-0002yp-EJ
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:01:01 -0500
Received: from lepiller.eu ([2a00:5884:8208::1]:43720)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <julien@lepiller.eu>) id 1ioSwE-0002uh-55
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:00:59 -0500
Received: from lepiller.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by lepiller.eu (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id a21584f5
 for <guix-patches@gnu.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 14:00:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lepiller.eu (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 95f6e56f
 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO)
 for <guix-patches@gnu.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 14:00:50 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:00:45 -0500
In-Reply-To: <874kx9xa9u.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <874kx9xa9u.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Julien Lepiller <julien@lepiller.eu>
Message-ID: <53E54994-18D2-4D82-8E96-3D6E8A3A9D14@lepiller.eu>
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: 38965@debbugs.gnu.org

Le 6 janvier 2020 03:24:29 GMT-05:00, Brett Gilio <brettg@gnu=2Eorg> a =C3=
=A9crit :
>

Looks like lablgtk2 -> ocaml-cairo2 -> lablgtk3 so we can't get rid of lab=
lgtk2=2E Are we sure we need it though?

In general, make sure to run guix lint on these patches, I could spot miss=
ing double spaces in descriptions of the first two for instance=2E