bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.

bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.

[Arun Isaac]

* gnu/packages/scheme.scm (racket): Update to 6.8.
---
 gnu/packages/scheme.scm | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/scheme.scm b/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
index 1ccf62586..f6aee005c 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
@@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ implementation techniques and as an expository tool.")
 (define-public racket
   (package
     (name "racket")
-    (version "6.6")
+    (version "6.8")
     (source (origin
              (method url-fetch)
              (uri (list (string-append "http://mirror.racket-lang.org/installers/"
@@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ implementation techniques and as an expository tool.")
                          version "/racket/racket-" version "-src-unix.tgz")))
              (sha256
               (base32
-               "1kzdi1n6h6hmz8zd9k8r5a5yp2ryi4w3c2fjm1k6cqicn18cwaxz"))))
+               "1l9z1a0r5zydr50cklx9xjw3l0pwnf64i10xq7112fl1r89q3qgv"))))
     (build-system gnu-build-system)
     (arguments
      '(#:phases
-- 
2.12.2

bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.

[Marius Bakke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 648 bytes --]

Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> writes:

> * gnu/packages/scheme.scm (racket): Update to 6.8.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/scheme.scm | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

LGTM. Trivial changes like these are generally OK to push without going
through this list as outlined in HACKING.

Just be mindful about the amount of rebuilds it will cause. If `guix
refresh -l <package>` prints more than ~300 dependents, it should go
through the "staging" or "core-updates" branch. See this thread for the
branching strategy:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00933.html

Thanks a lot for your contributions!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.

[Arun Isaac]

Pushed!

Marius Bakke writes:

> LGTM. Trivial changes like these are generally OK to push without going
> through this list as outlined in HACKING.
>
> Just be mindful about the amount of rebuilds it will cause. If `guix
> refresh -l <package>` prints more than ~300 dependents, it should go
> through the "staging" or "core-updates" branch. See this thread for the
> branching strategy:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00933.html

Sure, will keep that in mind!