From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51181) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eO2gA-0006nI-V5 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:34:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eO2g6-0004zw-1J for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:34:06 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45960) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eO2g5-0004zk-Uq for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:34:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eO2g5-0005e2-Mb for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:34:01 -0500 Subject: [bug#29457] [PATCH] gnu: emacs-org-contrib: Fix sha256 checksum due to emacs-org update. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20171126170755.10891-1-clement@lassieur.org> <87wp2cu1o2.fsf@gnu.org> <20171126223521.GA17517@jasmine.lan> <87a7z7f7hn.fsf@lassieur.org> <87induqqwq.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur In-reply-to: <87induqqwq.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 15:33:08 +0100 Message-ID: <87wp1utzyz.fsf@lassieur.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: 29457@debbugs.gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Hello, > > Clément Lassieur writes: > >> Leo Famulari writes: >>> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 11:15:41PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >>>> >>>> Was the SHA256 simply erroneous, or was the file modified in-place >>>> upstream? >>>> >>>> It’s a good idea to investigate a bit in such cases IMO. >>> >>> I assumed this was a case where a package FOO inherits another package >>> BAR's version, and BAR was updated, leaving FOO with a broken source. >>> >>> Otherwise, yes, all hash mismatches should be investigated and reported >>> upstream. >> >> Exactly. I'll put a comment, as suggested by Leo, so that we don't >> forget to update it anymore. > > But wouldn't it make more sense, in this case, to merge both packages > and let "contrib" be an output for emacs-org? Indeed, to me it makes sense, but Leo knows much more than me about packages, so I cc'ed him.