From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: bug#38087: IceCat: HTTPS Every-where becomes HTTPS No-where :-P Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:06:18 -0500 Message-ID: <875zjwjsfu.fsf__4670.18670621968$1573096096$gmane$org@netris.org> References: <5e2fe166b1303a53876f935a5715b67f33bbe2d6.camel@disroot.org> <87sgn1jbc4.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43288) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iSY9T-0000RC-6S for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:08:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iSY9S-00026d-7y for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:08:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60900) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iSY9S-00026V-5X for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:08:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iSY9R-0003fk-TZ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:08:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Raghav Gururajan Cc: 38087@debbugs.gnu.org, bug-gnuzilla@gnu.org Hi Raghav, Raghav Gururajan wrote: > Would it be better to reverse the version just before 68? > > I remember you mentioned something about security fix in the 68 > release; may be for now, it would be better to use the older version > with only the security patch from v68? It's not feasible for us to do this, because the underlying code has changed too much between versions 60.x and 68.x. Also, I just noticed that you cross-posted this bug report to both bug-gnuzilla and bug-guix. Please do not cross-post. In this case, the bug is not specific to Guix, so I will close the Guix bug. Follow-ups on this bug should go to only. Thanks, Mark