[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#40248: 27.0.90; Failure open .authinfo.gpg from Gnus
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#40248: 27.0.90; Failure open .authinfo.gpg from Gnus |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:23:40 +0300 |
> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, juanjose.garcia.ripoll@csic.es,
> 40248@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 04:45:59 +0200
>
> Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Eli> I'm not closing the bug because we still didn't make the more
> > invasive
> > Eli> change on master, AFAIR.
> >
> > I was waiting to see if Lars or anybody had any more comments. I can
> > post the complete patch over in emacs-devel.
>
> I see that Robert added:
>
> commit 6382e1330814ca4df20eeccd8b4ef9ca17b997af
> Author: Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu Apr 2 18:41:33 2020 +0200
>
> Add :coding support to open-network-stream and open-gnutls-stream
>
> I thought that was the "more invasive" change, but it's committed the
> day before the final exchange in this bug report.
No, it was committed on
CommitDate: Fri Apr 3 14:45:49 2020 +0200
which is 2 minutes _after_ that exchange.
The date you show above is AuthorDate, i.e. the date when Robert
committed this locally on his machine. (This confusion is precisely
the reason why I customized "git log" to show both of the dates.)
> So I'm not quite sure after skimming this thread now... has this all
> been resolved, or were there any further work to be done?
The "invasive" change is the above one; the less invasive one, which
was at the time done on emacs-27, was this one:
commit fa823653ffb0e3e893d30daa5abf68e909934e2e
Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
AuthorDate: Fri Apr 3 14:29:49 2020 +0300
Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
CommitDate: Fri Apr 3 14:29:49 2020 +0300
Fix invocations of gpg from Gnus
* lisp/epg-config.el (epg-config--make-gpg-configuration): Bind
coding-system-for-read/write to 'undecided', to countermand
possible values of 'no-conversion' or somesuch by the callers.
(Bug#40248)
So I think this bug can be closed. Robert?