[staging] libmicrohttpd: 0.9.74 -> 0.9.77, several unpinnings#278920
Merged
yorickvP merged 5 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom Feb 21, 2024
Merged
[staging] libmicrohttpd: 0.9.74 -> 0.9.77, several unpinnings#278920yorickvP merged 5 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom
yorickvP merged 5 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom
Conversation
panicgh
changed the title
ofborg
bot
requested review from
WilliButz,
ajs124,
anthonyroussel,
astro,
dasJ,
gbtb and
prusnak
ofborg
bot
added
10.rebuild-darwin: 101-500
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/3247 |
Member
|
@ofborg build proxysql taler libjson-rpc-cpp libmicrohttpd |
SuperSandro2000
approved these changes
Feb 6, 2024
panicgh
added
the
12.approvals: 2
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-already-reviewed/2617/1447 |
Contributor
|
lgtm |
yorickvP
approved these changes
Feb 21, 2024
Member
|
Perhaps it would be nice to have a look at pruning the set of versions? |
infinisil
added a commit
to tweag/nixpkgs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2024
The `pkgs/by-name` check currently fails on the staging-next merge into master (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/actions/runs/8110296543/job/22167262748) because it contains the changes of NixOS#278920, which introduced a "new" package using `callPackage` but not using `pkgs/by-name`. This was never noticed in that PR because CI last ran almosts 2 months ago, which is before the check for new packages was introduced. This wouldn't be a problem normally, it's only become a problem because of the staging-next merge into master, which effectively PRs the same change again (and the `pkgs/by-name` check doesn't try to distinguish between branches). The fix for this is a bit special because it's not actually a "new" package, but rather just a new version of an existing package. The `pkgs/by-name` check can't distinguish between such cases though. So instead we make sure that the `pkgs/by-name` check doesn't think of it as a package using `callPackage` by using the recommendation for multi-versioned packages from NixOS#292214.
13 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of changes
https://git.gnunet.org/libmicrohttpd.git/tree/ChangeLog?h=v0.9.77
I would keep the old versions for the moment and drop them when this mass rebuild went through fine and the old versions are known to not be needed any more (e.g. for pinning on the staging/staging-next cycles).
Closes #187811.
Since there are many pkgs transitively dependent on libmicrohttpd, I only built a hand-picked selection:
Result of
nixpkgs-reviewrun on x86_64-linux 116 packages built:
Things done
nix.conf? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxedsandbox = truenix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.