emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#42615: closed ([PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source URL’s.)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#42615: closed ([PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source URL’s.)
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2020 06:45:01 +0000

Your message dated Sat, 01 Aug 2020 08:44:45 +0200
with message-id <87zh7eamqq.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: [bug#42615] [PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source 
URL’s.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #42615,
regarding [PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source URL’s.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
42615: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=42615
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: [PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source URL’s. Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 09:05:18 +0200 User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Hi,

in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/42306 I noticed git:// URI’s in source
urls (see package nfs4-acl-tools) cause `guix lint` to fail currently. Attached
is a patch that fixes the issue, but I’m not sure that’s the “correct” way to
do it.

Cheers,
Lars

Attachment: 0001-guix-lint-Ignore-unsupported-source-URL-s.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: [bug#42615] [PATCH] guix: lint: Ignore unsupported source URL’s. Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2020 08:44:45 +0200 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
Hello,

> in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/42306 I noticed git:// URI’s in source
> urls (see package nfs4-acl-tools) cause `guix lint` to fail currently. 
> Attached
> is a patch that fixes the issue, but I’m not sure that’s the “correct” way to
> do it.

I considered adding a warning saying that URI validation failed, but
I think it can be misleading and let the user think that something is
wrong with the package definition.

Anyway looks fine, pushed!

Thanks,

Mathieu


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]