From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: 03/03: gnu: nss, nss-certs: Update to 3.27.2. Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:56:03 -0500 Message-ID: <878traa0qk.fsf@netris.org> References: <20161214151942.11288.43191@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <20161214151942.79CB12201D1@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53253) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPaS-0006zc-Le for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:56:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPaN-0001Xf-QR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:56:32 -0500 Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:36319) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPaN-0001Vf-MX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:56:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20161214151942.79CB12201D1@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> (Leo Famulari's message of "Wed, 14 Dec 2016 15:19:42 +0000 (UTC)") 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.name (Leo Famulari) writes: > lfam pushed a commit to branch master > in repository guix. > > commit 7ab3ea426640e4e7ae798a8f72b3c90b383cb824 > Author: Leo Famulari > Date: Tue Dec 13 18:59:50 2016 -0500 > > gnu: nss, nss-certs: Update to 3.27.2. > > * gnu/packages/gnuzilla.scm (nss): Update to 3.27.2. > * gnu/packages/certs.scm (nss-certs): Update to 3.27.2. Thanks for this, but unfortunately this version of 'nss' seems to consistently fail its test suite on armhf, or at least it has failed 3 times in a row. https://hydra.gnu.org/build/1712083 Given the importance of the proper functioning of this package, I'm not comfortable disabling the tests. Do we have reason to believe that this update fixes security flaws? Is there a compelling reason not to revert this update until a version is released that passes the test suite on our supported systems? Thanks, Mark