Conversation
Signed-off-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
|
|
||
| stdenv.mkDerivation rec { | ||
| pname = "dpcmd"; | ||
| version = "1.2"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What should I do here if the developers don't specify a version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Set the version to unstable-YYYY-MM-DD; that's what I was told to do for the em100 package.
ghost
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PR title should be dpcmd: init at ${version}.
People use this pattern (and package: ${oldver} -> ${newver}) to filter the flood of PRs that nixpkgs gets.
|
|
||
| stdenv.mkDerivation rec { | ||
| pname = "dpcmd"; | ||
| version = "1.2"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Set the version to unstable-YYYY-MM-DD; that's what I was told to do for the em100 package.
| description = "Linux software for SF100/SF600"; | ||
| license = licenses.gpl2; | ||
| maintainers = with maintainers; [ felixsinger ]; | ||
| platforms = platforms.linux; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| platforms = platforms.linux; | |
| platforms = platforms.unix; |
Is there something about the software that fundamentally cannot work on other unices? I know upstream put "Linux" in the name of the package, but there are no Linux-specific #includes...
Overly-restrictive meta.platforms settings are really annoying to people who don't use x86_64-linux. Nixpkgs shouldn't throw simply because nobody's tried a particular platform/package combination yet...
|
not needed anymore as it was packaged by someone else. |
Motivation for this change
Init package. WIP.
Things done
sandbox = trueset innix.conf? (See Nix manual)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)nixos/doc/manual/md-to-db.shto update generated release notes