From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41098)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eJVsT-0000zY-N6
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:06 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eJVsQ-0005yt-Jr
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:05 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:52840)
	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 1eJVsQ-0005yo-GB
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1eJVsQ-0002KC-85
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:02 -0500
Subject: [bug#29457] [PATCH] gnu: emacs-org-contrib: Fix sha256 checksum due
	to emacs-org update.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.29457.B29457.15118370168893@debbugs.gnu.org>
References: <20171126170755.10891-1-clement@lassieur.org>
	<87wp2cu1o2.fsf@gnu.org> <20171126223521.GA17517@jasmine.lan>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur <clement@lassieur.org>
In-reply-to: <20171126223521.GA17517@jasmine.lan>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 03:43:32 +0100
Message-ID: <87a7z7f7hn.fsf@lassieur.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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: <http://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: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
Cc: 29457@debbugs.gnu.org

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> 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.

Thanks,
Clément