From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: 07/07: gnu: emacs-ghub: Update to 3.2.0. Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 15:04:57 -0500 Message-ID: <87va2vvu2j.fsf@netris.org> References: <20190109214312.21187.54045@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20190109214315.1BE5121122@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87va2wia3e.fsf@netris.org> <87muo7fjfu.fsf@fsfe.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44905) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gi34J-0006d1-GQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2019 15:06:16 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gi34I-0005ym-Kd for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2019 15:06:15 -0500 Received: from world.peace.net ([64.112.178.59]:49632) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gi34I-0005k4-Fl for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2019 15:06:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87muo7fjfu.fsf@fsfe.org> (Jelle Licht's message of "Fri, 11 Jan 2019 13:49:25 +0100") 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: Jelle Licht Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Jelle Licht writes: > Mark H Weaver writes: > >> Hi Jelle, >> [...] >> >> In toplevel form: >> magit-reset.el:30:1:Error: Cannot open load file: No such file or directory, graphql >> make[1]: *** [Makefile:65: magit-reset.elc] Error 1 >> make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/guix-build-emacs-magit-2.13.0.drv-0/magit-2.13.0/lisp' >> make: *** [Makefile:72: lisp] Error 2 > > I am not quite sure what goes wrong, but I do know that ghub and magit > should probably be updated in lockstep. I reverted the patch for now and > will push it once I have verified other things still work. Later I will > update everything at once when emacs-forge is properly released. Sounds good, thanks. > BTW, how does our one-change-per-patch policy apply when running into > situations where multiple changes have to be made at once in order to > keep everything building correctly? In this case, I would keep them as separate commits, but push them at the same time. Thanks! Mark