GNU bug report logs -
#55082
emacs-28.1-installer.exe not signed by Phillip Lord
Previous Next
Reported by: Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:27:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Fixed in version 29.1
Done: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 55082 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 55082 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:27:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:27:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/download.html says that Windows
binaries are signed by Phillip Lord, but
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-28/emacs-28.1-installer.exe
is signed by Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st>. Does the web page need to
be updated?
--
Matt
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:31:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:26 AM Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org> wrote:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/download.html says that Windows
> binaries are signed by Phillip Lord, but
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-28/emacs-28.1-installer.exe
> is signed by Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st>. Does the web page need to
> be updated?
Hi Matt,
Yes, thanks!
I'm not sure I know where these sources are; if I can figure it out
I'll prepare a patch but feel free to have a swing at it if you are so
inclined.
Thanks for reporting.
Corwin
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:36:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> writes:
> I'm not sure I know where these sources are; if I can figure it out
> I'll prepare a patch but feel free to have a swing at it if you are so
> inclined.
It's in the CVS repo for the web pages. I can update them (if you don't
have cvs installed) -- here's the current text, what should it be
updated to?
------------
<p>The Windows binaries are signed by Phillip
Lord <code>8E64 B119 FE4B AC58 C767 D5EC E095 C1A6 3FB1 EAD2</code>.</p>
<p>MSYS2 users can install Emacs (64bits build) with the following:</p>
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:53:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 1:34 PM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
>
> Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> writes:
>
> I can update them
I did manage to find them; a patch is attached.
Thank you Lars.
[update-win32-builder.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 19:57:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 1:51 PM Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 1:34 PM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
> >
> > I can update them
>
> I did manage to find them; a patch is attached.
Apropos, I notice there's no mention of the executable installer on
the page either. Would it make sense for me to try preparing a second
patch to provide some information about the binary release versions we
currently produce for MS Windows? If so, is it worth having a new bug
report to keep track of that seperately that work/discussion
separately?
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 20:00:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> writes:
> I did manage to find them; a patch is attached.
Thanks; now checked in, so the web pages should update themselves within
some minutes.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 20:07:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> writes:
> Apropos, I notice there's no mention of the executable installer on
> the page either. Would it make sense for me to try preparing a second
> patch to provide some information about the binary release versions we
> currently produce for MS Windows?
What kind of information did you have in mind? I think that web page
should be kept as concise as possible, with the bare minimum of talk
beyond how to download things on various platforms.
> If so, is it worth having a new bug report to keep track of that
> seperately that work/discussion separately?
No, discussing that's fine here.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 23 Apr 2022 20:35:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 3:06 PM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
>
> What kind of information did you have in mind? I think that web page
> should be kept as concise as possible, with the bare minimum of talk
> beyond how to download things on various platforms.
Right, and I tend to agree FWIW.
Here's one option that reduces things further:
--- download.html.orig 2022-04-23 15:19:55.160069600 -0500
+++ download.html 2022-04-23 15:28:26.108068700 -0500
@@ -145,10 +145,9 @@
GNU mirror</a>; or the <a
href="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/">main
GNU FTP server</a>.
<br/>
- Unzip the zip file preserving the directory
structure, and run
- <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. Alternatively,
create a desktop shortcut to
- <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>, and start Emacs
by double-clicking on that
- shortcut's icon.
+ Binaries are provided in several forms. Most
simply, download and run the
+ emacs-<code>version</code>-installer.exe which
will install Emacs and
+ create shortcuts for you.
</p>
<p>The Windows binaries are signed by Corwin
Here's a less intrusive alternative, attempting to minimally add
mention of the self-installer:
--- download.html.orig 2022-04-23 15:19:55.160069600 -0500
+++ download.html 2022-04-23 15:31:50.015567900 -0500
@@ -146,9 +146,11 @@
GNU FTP server</a>.
<br/>
Unzip the zip file preserving the directory
structure, and run
- <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. Alternatively,
create a desktop shortcut to
+ <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. You can create
a desktop shortcut to
<code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>, and start Emacs
by double-clicking on that
- shortcut's icon.
+ shortcut's icon. Alternately, download and run the
+ emacs-<code>version</code>-installer.exe which
will install Emacs and
+ create shortcuts for you.
</p>
<p>The Windows binaries are signed by Corwin
Patches for both versions are attached.
[mention-win32-installer.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
[prefer-installer-for-win32.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 05:16:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st>
> Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 15:34:16 -0500
> Cc: 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org>
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 3:06 PM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
> >
> > What kind of information did you have in mind? I think that web page
> > should be kept as concise as possible, with the bare minimum of talk
> > beyond how to download things on various platforms.
>
> Right, and I tend to agree FWIW.
>
> Here's one option that reduces things further:
>
> --- download.html.orig 2022-04-23 15:19:55.160069600 -0500
> +++ download.html 2022-04-23 15:28:26.108068700 -0500
> @@ -145,10 +145,9 @@
> GNU mirror</a>; or the <a
> href="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/">main
> GNU FTP server</a>.
> <br/>
> - Unzip the zip file preserving the directory
> structure, and run
> - <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. Alternatively,
> create a desktop shortcut to
> - <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>, and start Emacs
> by double-clicking on that
> - shortcut's icon.
> + Binaries are provided in several forms. Most
> simply, download and run the
> + emacs-<code>version</code>-installer.exe which
> will install Emacs and
> + create shortcuts for you.
> </p>
>
> <p>The Windows binaries are signed by Corwin
>
> Here's a less intrusive alternative, attempting to minimally add
> mention of the self-installer:
>
> --- download.html.orig 2022-04-23 15:19:55.160069600 -0500
> +++ download.html 2022-04-23 15:31:50.015567900 -0500
> @@ -146,9 +146,11 @@
> GNU FTP server</a>.
> <br/>
> Unzip the zip file preserving the directory
> structure, and run
> - <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. Alternatively,
> create a desktop shortcut to
> + <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. You can create
> a desktop shortcut to
> <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>, and start Emacs
> by double-clicking on that
> - shortcut's icon.
> + shortcut's icon. Alternately, download and run the
> + emacs-<code>version</code>-installer.exe which
> will install Emacs and
> + create shortcuts for you.
> </p>
>
> <p>The Windows binaries are signed by Corwin
>
> Patches for both versions are attached.
The second one is better, IMO, but please fix a minor stylistic nit:
saying "Alternately" twice in a row should be avoided. How about
replacing the second on with "Or"?
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 05:45:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #32 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 12:15 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> The second one is better, IMO, but please fix a minor stylistic nit:
> saying "Alternately" twice in a row should be avoided. How about
> replacing the second on with "Or"?
I believe I had reworded the prior occurrence to avoid using
"Alternately" twice. Any chance you misread the patch? In any event,
although I prefer the first/shorter version, I'm fine deferring to
your judgment (it's why I proffered two versions, after all).
Thanks for weighing in.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:17:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #35 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st>
> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 00:43:47 -0500
> Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org>
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 12:15 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > The second one is better, IMO, but please fix a minor stylistic nit:
> > saying "Alternately" twice in a row should be avoided. How about
> > replacing the second on with "Or"?
>
> I believe I had reworded the prior occurrence to avoid using
> "Alternately" twice. Any chance you misread the patch?
Yes, sorry. But the rewording loses information: it makes it sound
like one must do the second step, whereas the original text correctly
explained that it is an alternative to the first method.
IOW, we now have 2.5 methods for installation, not just 2 as your text
hints.
> In any event, although I prefer the first/shorter version, I'm fine
> deferring to your judgment (it's why I proffered two versions, after
> all).
It might be shorter, but it says nothing about the zip file, and IMO
this is important, especially for people who are uneasy running
executables downloaded from Web sites, or running installers in
general. (It is okay, IMO, to mention the installer version first and
the zip version second, though.)
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:23:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #38 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:16 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> It might be shorter, but it says nothing about the zip file, and IMO
> this is important, especially for people who are uneasy running
> executables downloaded from Web sites, or running installers in
> general. (It is okay, IMO, to mention the installer version first and
> the zip version second, though.)
Thanks for these very helpful comments; I'll work up a new patch.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:33:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #41 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:22 AM Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 1:16 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > It might be shorter, but it says nothing about the zip file, and IMO
> > this is important, especially for people who are uneasy running
> > executables downloaded from Web sites, or running installers in
> > general. (It is okay, IMO, to mention the installer version first and
> > the zip version second, though.)
>
> Thanks for these very helpful comments; I'll work up a new patch.
A next patch attempt is quoted below and included as an attachment.
--- download.html.orig 2022-04-23 15:19:55.160069600 -0500
+++ download.html 2022-04-24 01:29:10.486570000 -0500
@@ -145,9 +145,11 @@
GNU mirror</a>; or the <a
href="http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/">main
GNU FTP server</a>.
<br/>
- Unzip the zip file preserving the directory
structure, and run
- <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>. Alternatively,
create a desktop shortcut to
- <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>, and start Emacs
by double-clicking on that
+ Mostly simply, download and run the
emacs-<code>version</code>-installer.exe
+ which will install Emacs and create shortcuts
for you. Alternately, download
+ emacs-<code>version</code>.zip then unzip,
preserving the directory structure.
+ You can then run <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code>
or create a desktop shortcut to
+ <code>bin\runemacs.exe</code> and start Emacs
by double-clicking on that
shortcut's icon.
</p>
[mention-win32-installer-first.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 11:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #44 received at 55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Corwin Brust <corwin <at> bru.st> writes:
> A next patch attempt is quoted below and included as an attachment.
Looks good to me; checked in now.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug marked as fixed in version 29.1, send any further explanations to
55082 <at> debbugs.gnu.org and Matthew James Kraai <kraai <at> ftbfs.org>
Request was from
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 11:20:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 15:30:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #49 received at 55082-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 6:18 AM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
>
> Looks good to me; checked in now.
I think things are looking good now so I'm marking this bug as done.
If there's more to do please reply to the debbugs address (the version
without the -done suffix) and we can re-open.
Thanks again for reporting.
Corwin
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#55082; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 24 Apr 2022 23:58:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #52 received at 55082-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 10:29:03AM -0500, Corwin Brust wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 6:18 AM Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
> >
> > Looks good to me; checked in now.
>
> I think things are looking good now so I'm marking this bug as done.
> If there's more to do please reply to the debbugs address (the version
> without the -done suffix) and we can re-open.
>
> Thanks again for reporting.
Thank you for fixing it.
--
Matt
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Mon, 23 May 2022 11:24:07 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 24 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.