goshs: init at 1.0.2

[fabaff]

HTTP Server

https://github.com/patrickhener/goshs

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• 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/)
• 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 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.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[fabaff]

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 396568

---

x86_64-linux

✅ 1 package built:

• goshs

[haylinmoore]

Suggested change

	description = "HTTP Server";
	description = "Simple yet feature-rich web server";

I feel like the description should be something more than just "HTTP Server"? I grabbed this line from their website

[haylinmoore]

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review-gha

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 396568

Logs: https://github.com/haylinmoore/nixpkgs-review-gha/actions/runs/14294007592

---

x86_64-linux

✅ 1 package built:

• goshs

---

aarch64-linux

✅ 1 package built:

• goshs

---

x86_64-darwin

❌ 1 package failed to build:

• goshs

---

aarch64-darwin

❌ 1 package failed to build:

• goshs

[ilarvne]

Hi @fabaff, thanks for contribution!
It looks like this PR is a duplicate of #366872

[lucasew]

Hi @fabaff, thanks for contribution! It looks like this PR is a duplicate of #366872

But updated, we can close that once this is merged

[haylinmoore]

Hi @fabaff, thanks for contribution! It looks like this PR is a duplicate of #366872

Given the lack of forward progress on the other PR, letting this one proceed and then closing the other if/when this merges make the most sense to me? I sent a message in the other PR to check for signs of life.