Hello,
We're now at 2.2.39 on master. Closing!
--
Thanks,
Maxim
Simon Tournier wrote:
> Are you proposing to update ’gnupg’ from 2.2.32 to 2.2.33 or why not to
> 2.2.41? And remove the graft ’gnupg/fixed’?
Personally, I think it should advance farther than 2.2.32, as there
are S/MIME bugs prior to 2.2.35 that prevent a variety of
commonly-issued S/MIME keys f
Hi Leo,
On Tue, 04 Apr 2023 at 21:27, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> So the impact is ~10% of all the packages. From a quick look, some
>> packages are intensive to rebuild, to my knowledge.
>
> Yes, that's correct. But our build farm can easily build these packages
> quickly, if we wanted to use it fo
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 07:31:47PM +0200, Simon Tournier wrote:
> Maybe I am doing something wrong, I get:
>
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> $ guix refresh -l gnupg | cut -f1 -d':'
> Building the following 1491 packages would ensure 2880 dependent packages are
Hi Leo,
On Tue, 04 Apr 2023 at 12:23, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> Well, graft does not seem recommended because it would update to two
>> versions. And update the package would be a core-updates.
>>
>> Well, maybe it could be of the current core-updates dance. Could you
>> send a patch for core-up
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 09:01:33AM -0400, Ethan Blanton via Bug reports for GNU
Guix wrote:
> However, the bug referenced here is fixed in upstream commit
> 4cc724639c012215f59648cbb4b7631b9d352e36, which shipped in gnupg
> 2.2.34. Meanwhile, all gnupg releases older than 2.2.35 suffer from
> an
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 11:48:31AM +0200, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 09:01, Ethan Blanton via Bug reports for GNU Guix
> wrote:
> > I believe the pin on 2.2.32 can be lifted, but as gnupg is important
> > infrastructure I am unsure about directly submitting a patch to update
>
Hi,
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 09:01, Ethan Blanton via Bug reports for GNU Guix
wrote:
> I believe the pin on 2.2.32 can be lifted, but as gnupg is important
> infrastructure I am unsure about directly submitting a patch to update
> to a newer version.
Well, graft does not seem recommended because
It looks like the gnupg package is pinned at 2.2.32 with the following
note:
;; Note2: 2.2.33 currently suffers from regressions, so do not update to it
;; (see: https://dev.gnupg.org/T5742).
However, the bug referenced here is fixed in upstream commit
4cc724639c012215f59648cbb4b7631b9d35
