Hi Vagrant, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> skribis:
> On 2020-04-09, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Hello Guix! >> >> I’ve run “make release” from the new ‘version-1.1.0’ branch and uploaded >> the result: >> >> https://web.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/software/guix/1.1.0rc1 > > The only tarball I see there is: > > > https://web.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/software/guix/1.1.0rc1/guix-1.0.1.13450-01d5f2.tar.gz > > Which does not correspond to the commit from 01d5f2 (which happens to be > a few hundred commits behind master)... The machinery picked up a stale commit ID. Fixed in 08b14ab20ebe181690df6210a0b3f95bad494af5. > Which commit was it actually built with? I know it's not a release, per > se, but git tags would be *really* helpful even for release candidates... The source tarball corresponds to 98148830c0afb9adc8acf150afc48f09aae42ac1 on ‘version-1.1.0’. I’ve added a tag now. However, “make release” creates two additional commits as it updates the ‘guix’ package, and I chose to not push them. > When building my own local guix tarballs, I found it disturbingly easy > to get the wrong version information into the tarball .version and > .tarball-version and consequently the resulting tarball... Agreed, sorry for the confusion. > I notice gnu/services/linux.scm is also missing in some of my locally > built git snapshot tarballs, so there appears to be something broken in > the tarball generation process. I see you fixed it in the meantime. Thanks for reporting these issues! Ludo’.
