From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Brett Gilio <brettg@posteo.net>
Subject: fuse & sshfs
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:31:20 -0500
Message-ID: <87imv0p4av.fsf@posteo.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54005)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1hKD7g-0004pB-U5
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:31:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1hKD7f-0007Ap-Ez
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:31:28 -0400
Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:33484)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1hKD7e-00077u-OD
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:31:27 -0400
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130])
	by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60CEB16005D
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 04:31:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 44rZfy2YJHz6tm6
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 04:31:21 +0200 (CEST)
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Hi all,

With 1.0 around the corner, is there any priority for packages like
fuse? The latest release is 3.5 and we are using 2.9.

All of these packages depend on it
casync@2 multipath-tools@0.7.9 fio@3.13 python-llfuse@0.41.1
python-fusepy@2.0.4 python2-gdrivefs@0.14.9 python2-llfuse@1.3.5
borg@1.1.9 skopeo@0.1.28 flatpak@1.2.4 unionfs-fuse@2.0 fuseiso@20070708
fuse-exfat@1.3.0 archivemount@0.8.12 sshfs@2.10 testdisk@7.0 ifuse@1.1.3
spacefm@1.0.6 caja-extensions@1.22.0 mate@1.22.0 lxde@0.99.2
gnome-tweak-tool@3.26.4 gnome@3.24.3 httpfs2@0.1.5 curlftpfs@0.9.2
disorderfs@0.5.6 apfs-fuse@0.0.0-0.c7036a3 encfs@1.9.5 sra-tools@2.9.3
wimlib@1.13.0

Is it maybe lingering in one of our unmerged branches out there? If not,
I wouldn't mind trying to take a crack at bumping it. I know for a fact
that not updating it limits out ability to upgrade sshfs since it
depends on version >3.

Best

Brett Gilio