From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: iyzsong@member.fsf.org (=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?=) Subject: Re: [bug#29708] Update s-shell Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 13:30:42 +0800 Message-ID: <87zi6jp7ct.fsf@member.fsf.org> References: <20171214133123.ymo5dxscjqhsbkfn@abyayala> <87efnx8bm4.fsf@gnu.org> <20171214173835.u7elrv4lrnlv3mqr@abyayala> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42870) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eQ53q-0001Pf-U8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Dec 2017 00:30:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eQ53n-0008F8-Qg for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Dec 2017 00:30:58 -0500 Received: from rezeros.cc ([2001:19f0:7001:2f3e:5400:ff:fe84:e55d]:35524) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eQ53n-0008DA-CR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Dec 2017 00:30:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20171214173835.u7elrv4lrnlv3mqr@abyayala> (ng0@n0.is's message of "Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:38:35 +0000") 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: ng0@n0.is Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org ng0 writes: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s transcribed 0.4K bytes: >> ng0 skribis: >>=20 >> > From cf2cbe9e9e525aa9dd697fcedb255a0fbc194ac9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> > From: ng0 >> > Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 13:22:58 +0000 >> > Subject: [PATCH] s-shell: Update to commit >> > da2e5c20c0c5f477ec3426dc2584889a789b1659. >> > >> > * gnu/packages/shells.scm (s-shell): Update to commit da2e5c20c0c5f477= ec3426dc2584889a789b1659. >> > (version): Use 'git-version'. >>=20 >> I adjusted the commit log and pushed. > > Why is it [version]? Shouldn't it be (version)? > Even though [version] now makes sense, I've seen > mostly [] when it followed a () - and that's why > I've been using ()[] and never(?) [] on its own. Here the top level is the same as previous line, so it can be ommited: * ... (s-shell): ... [version]: ... is same as: * ... (s-shell): ... (s-shell)[version]: ...