From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44076) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2N3v-0001oL-G4 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:53:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2N3u-0007PH-Om for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:53:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:54056) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2N3u-0007P8-LK for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:53:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2N3u-0006C5-BX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:53:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#28004] Chromium Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <87y3qvb15k.fsf@fastmail.com> <20171010131949.y43plpzxbppvrigr@abyayala> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 21:52:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20171010131949.y43plpzxbppvrigr@abyayala> (ng0@infotropique.org's message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:19:49 +0000") Message-ID: <87lgkha2cx.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: ng0 , Leo Famulari Cc: 28004@debbugs.gnu.org Hi! ng0 skribis: > Marius Bakke transcribed 43K bytes: >> Hello Guix! >>=20 >> Attached is a patch for Chromium, a popular web browser. >>=20 >> It requires the new ld wrapper from 'core-updates' and a very powerful >> build machine (a quad-core Sandy Bridge Xeon uses 2-3 hours). >>=20 >> Note that I cannot guarantee timely delivery of security updates. Major >> version upgrades are hugely painful, and almost always contain many >> high-severity fixes. Should we mention that in the description? >>=20 >> Happy for any feedback. > > Hi, > > could this patch be merged into master now? Probably (I think at the time Marius submitted it the =E2=80=98ld=E2=80=99 = wrapper enhancements were not in =E2=80=98master=E2=80=99 yet.) For the security aspect though, given that it=E2=80=99s a fairly critical component, I=E2=80=99d like to have Leo=E2=80=99s opinion. Thoughts? > It would be too bad to see this gathering digitial dust. Indeed! Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.