segger-jlink: 766 -> 792b

[MGlolenstine]

Description of changes

Version bump.
Tested for flashing of a local project, which works.

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandbox = true set in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 23.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[matthiasbeyer]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 252137 run on x86_64-linux 1

[MGlolenstine]

I updated it to 792b, two versions newer than 792.
I thought b denoted a beta build, but it doesn't, as previous versions seem to go up to n.

[matthiasbeyer]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 252137 run on x86_64-linux 1

[matthiasbeyer]

I don't know why the review does not build the package... 🤔

[MGlolenstine]

That is weird, it was also reported in the previous PR #244637.
Could it be due to the license requirements?

[pinpox]

I think this is superseded by #255185