Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

haxe: 4.3.4 -> 4.3.5 #332277

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 6, 2024
Merged

haxe: 4.3.4 -> 4.3.5 #332277

merged 2 commits into from
Aug 6, 2024

Conversation

bwkam
Copy link
Member

@bwkam bwkam commented Aug 4, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Description of changes

update haxe
https://haxe.org/download/

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:
  • 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/)
  • 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 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.

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from MarcWeber August 4, 2024 17:24
@ofborg ofborg bot added 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes 10.rebuild-darwin: 11-100 10.rebuild-linux: 11-100 labels Aug 4, 2024
@bwkam bwkam marked this pull request as draft August 4, 2024 17:44
@JeremiahSecrist
Copy link
Contributor

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332277 run on x86_64-linux 1

9 packages failed to build:
  • haxe
  • haxePackages.format
  • haxePackages.heaps
  • haxePackages.hlopenal
  • haxePackages.hlsdl
  • haxePackages.hxcpp
  • haxePackages.hxcs
  • haxePackages.hxjava
  • haxePackages.hxnodejs_4

@bwkam bwkam marked this pull request as ready for review August 4, 2024 18:13
@JeremiahSecrist
Copy link
Contributor

it looks the issue persists upon rerunning it. I recommend testing locally as well with the command I used above.

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332277 run on x86_64-linux 1

9 packages failed to build:
  • haxe
  • haxePackages.format
  • haxePackages.heaps
  • haxePackages.hlopenal
  • haxePackages.hlsdl
  • haxePackages.hxcpp
  • haxePackages.hxcs
  • haxePackages.hxjava
  • haxePackages.hxnodejs_4

@bwkam
Copy link
Member Author

bwkam commented Aug 4, 2024

it looks the issue persists upon rerunning it. I recommend testing locally as well with the command I used above.

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332277 run on x86_64-linux 1
9 packages failed to build:

I tried running the haxe binary locally before pushing, and it worked alright. I haven't tried nixpkgs-review though.

@bwkam
Copy link
Member Author

bwkam commented Aug 4, 2024

oops, seems like I accidentally fetched the hash for nightly haxe, not 4.3.5.

@JeremiahSecrist
Copy link
Contributor

we have builds!
Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332277 run on x86_64-linux 1

9 packages built:
  • haxe
  • haxePackages.format
  • haxePackages.heaps
  • haxePackages.hlopenal
  • haxePackages.hlsdl
  • haxePackages.hxcpp
  • haxePackages.hxcs
  • haxePackages.hxjava
  • haxePackages.hxnodejs_4

@JeremiahSecrist JeremiahSecrist self-requested a review August 4, 2024 20:47
JeremiahSecrist
JeremiahSecrist reviewed Aug 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
pkgs/development/compilers/haxe/default.nix
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh! Can we move this to pkgs/by-name/ha? They changed the repo structure a while back and are gradually migrating everything. I'm not sure if this needs to be a separate PR/Commit, so let's wait for someone else to weigh in.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can migrate it in a second commit or wait for this to be automatically done at some point in the future (#211832).

Copy link
Member Author

@bwkam bwkam Aug 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if it's really important, I can move it. But, I prefer the latter.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No it's not.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

then LGTM

@drupol drupol merged commit 6386378 into NixOS:master Aug 6, 2024
37 of 39 checks passed
@bwkam bwkam deleted the update-haxe branch August 6, 2024 20:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@drupol drupol drupol left review comments

@JeremiahSecrist JeremiahSecrist JeremiahSecrist approved these changes

@MarcWeber MarcWeber Awaiting requested review from MarcWeber

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 11-100 10.rebuild-linux: 11-100 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@bwkam @JeremiahSecrist @drupol