[debbugs-tracker] bug#26502: closed ([PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 16 Apr 2017 02:53:08 +0530
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #26502,
regarding [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
26502: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=26502
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sat, 15 Apr 2017 01:54:35 +0530
>
>
>
>
> * gnu/packages/scheme.scm (racket): Update to 6.8.
> ---
>  gnu/packages/scheme.scm | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/scheme.scm b/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
> index 1ccf62586..f6aee005c 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/scheme.scm
> @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ implementation techniques and as an expository tool.")
>  (define-public racket
>    (package
>      (name "racket")
> -    (version "6.6")
> +    (version "6.8")
>      (source (origin
>               (method url-fetch)
>               (uri (list (string-append 
> "http://mirror.racket-lang.org/installers/";
> @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ implementation techniques and as an expository tool.")
>                           version "/racket/racket-" version "-src-unix.tgz")))
>               (sha256
>                (base32
> -               "1kzdi1n6h6hmz8zd9k8r5a5yp2ryi4w3c2fjm1k6cqicn18cwaxz"))))
> +               "1l9z1a0r5zydr50cklx9xjw3l0pwnf64i10xq7112fl1r89q3qgv"))))
>      (build-system gnu-build-system)
>      (arguments
>       '(#:phases
> -- 
> 2.12.2
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#26502: [PATCH] gnu: racket: Update to 6.8.
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 16 Apr 2017 02:53:08 +0530
>
>
>
>
> Pushed!
>
> Marius Bakke writes:
>
> > LGTM. Trivial changes like these are generally OK to push without going
> > through this list as outlined in HACKING.
> >
> > Just be mindful about the amount of rebuilds it will cause. If `guix
> > refresh -l <package>` prints more than ~300 dependents, it should go
> > through the "staging" or "core-updates" branch. See this thread for the
> > branching strategy:
> >
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00933.html
>
> Sure, will keep that in mind!
>
>
> --- End Message ---