[25.05] ente-desktop: 1.7.11 -> 1.7.14#447316
[25.05] ente-desktop: 1.7.11 -> 1.7.14#447316yuyuyureka merged 2 commits intoNixOS:release-25.05from
Conversation
This matches the upstream, we just forgot to update it https://github.com/ente-io/ente/blob/photosd-v1.7.14/desktop/package.json#L51 (cherry picked from commit 586de32)
|
|
Seems like darwin build is broken, something with "cp" seems to resolve to an empty string and make "cp" think it wasnt given a second argument. Not familiar enough with this to know more, just pointing it out. |
|
"The darwin build is broken" or "This breaks the darwin build"? - there is a difference |
|
@yuyuyureka I was very confused by your comment. Yeah im aware there is a difference, like probably most people would be, but im not familiar with the history of the package or the package itself, like i mentioned above. So i dont know if it was already broken for a long time, or if this backport broke it. Seems like you know more about that than i do: #427695 (comment) So assuming this is known and accepted as is, i dont really understand what the comment you send is supposed to tell me or others, seems pretty irrelevant to the comment i wrote and this discussion, unless im misunderstanding something. Sorry in advance if im just misunderstanding, i dont mean to start anything, but without more context for the intention behind it, the only way i can read that comment in my head and actually make the words mean something, is as a snarky response to me trying to offer a bit of help. Could just be that text is text and im misunderstanding, or that im too tired to come up with another way to interpret it, or literally anything else. Sidenote: Shouldnt the build be fixed or if not possible the support for darwin be removed? Not sure what the policy on that kind of stuff is. I know marking something as broken is a thing, but im unsure if thats usable for a platform or just the entire package as a whole. |
|
Let me re-phrase it: Could you please test if the previous version of this package does or doesn't build on darwin? If the version without/before this PR does build, there is something wrong being introduced in this PR and it should be fixed before the PR is merged. If it doesn't build, there is still something wrong but it doesn't have anything to do with this PR and shouldn't block it. |
|
Ahhh that makes a lot more sense, thanks for the clarification, i will run the same thing over the previous version without the changes included in this backport. |
|
I started a CI job for each PR that touches this package, including the init one. Since they are old and its peak automatic CI time and this is on Darwin, this will take a while. So im gonna go to bed, let this run and hope it doesnt fail for some reason. If it does i will report back after sleep. 1.7.11 Update: https://github.com/ToasterUwU/nixpkgs-review-gha/actions/runs/18122942108 This way you can check progress yourself if you want while i sleep. |
|
Maybe needs something like this commit to fix the error? aee7acd |
|
OK, just checked the logs after waking up. Seems like this package never worked on Darwin. So this backport can go ahead, but there needs to be a separate issue or PR about the Darwin build failure |
|
@ToasterUwU thanks for checking |
6ca1804
Manual backports of #427695, #442605
Things done
passthru.tests.nixpkgs-reviewon this PR. See nixpkgs-review usage../result/bin/.Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.