#47144 - security patching of 'patch' package

Package	Source(s)		Maintainer(s)
guix		PTS Buildd Popcon

Message #80 received at 47144@debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Received: (at 47144) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Jun 2024 16:05:09 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 05 12:05:09 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45258 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1sEt8N-0005Pe-Uf
	for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:05:08 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48818)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1sEt8L-0005Os-DV
 for 47144@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:05:06 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
 id 1sEt7z-0008Ps-E9; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:04:43 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
 s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
 From; bh=GMnuJVI0ye5ItXouj+QpbhhER1yqSqKcV4IilQjA1WY=; b=V4muZFtn7kywlgsFcv8w
 F4kNyY3+rqyV8J8TWGPFUAHQbZoFceRZNW+qDa6G7SWG47ZNv22leTJtlYZqlaygEmgxcegGTzDjY
 1ITOOq8kM6BDU6T10axn9jHftwpw/KxIfQ1WtUBXld8Ysxh2oyENPIMAb4Leg4WXDJHgaQC9kWVMK
 kiRULJl8SHhwkJk0NLc3G78rqupi+DkVyAqrMtsqF5Kx7t+6O3WlJGPuYvWckGt3pyiMGLusfrpjE
 JXHDwWubq7L8tXQd8by+hcs4j4kR1YwdnR5Iilax4n0VbXGRFM171zcFtIcXXApD+2KkeUG/f1tLL
 EmYJPX2sNB+lYA==;
From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#47144: security patching of 'patch' package
In-Reply-To: <875xusln8m.fsf@gmail.com> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Sat, 01
 Jun 2024 11:02:49 -0400")
References: <28b457771ab0e7ad87cb65600a5898f68be5074a.1717124361.git.maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
 <5eda21a09360653b198f1b0d7f52cf531dc97485.1717124361.git.maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
 <87r0dgn36w.fsf@gnu.org> <875xusln8m.fsf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 18:04:39 +0200
Message-ID: <878qzj74vc.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 47144
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>, 47144@debbugs.gnu.org,
 Vivien Kraus <vivien@planete-kraus.eu>, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)

Hi Maxim,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

[...]

>> Unless I’m mistaken, this will have practically no effect because Patch
>> is a build-time-only dependency.
>>
>> My recommendation would be to not add a ‘replacement’ field at all.
>> Instead, you could add a new ‘patch/latest’ public variable pointing to
>> that commit that you picked.  That way, users running ‘guix install
>> patch’ or similar will get the latest version of Patch.
>
> I see what you mean, but for all practical purposes, using a graft seems
> a more thorough (because it affects the original 'patch' *variable* as
> well) means that have the same effect for users, so I'd seems like a
> slightly better option to me.

Strictly speaking, yes, but in practice the benefit are largely
theoretical IMO, and the cost of having a graft this deep in the
dependency graph.

What about renaming ‘patch’ to ‘patch/pinned’ and having ‘patch’ point
to the new version?

Internally, we’d refer to ‘patch/pinned’ in (guix packages), but user
code etc. would refer to ‘patch’ and thus get the latest version.

Ludo’.

Display info messages

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.

debbugs.gnu.org maintainers <help-debbugs@gnu.org>. Last modified: Sat Dec 21 16:47:12 2024; Machine Name: wallace-server

GNU bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

#47144 security patching of 'patch' package