pcsx2: 1.7.5779 -> 1.7.5919 #324113
pcsx2: 1.7.5779 -> 1.7.5919 #324113
Conversation
|
Result of 1 package built:
|
|
Tested through to a game -- seemed to launch and play fine. |
|
@getchoo thanks for the feedback, ready for re-review 🙏🏻 |
| src = fetchFromGitHub { | ||
| owner = "google"; | ||
| repo = "shaderc"; | ||
| rev = "v${version}"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| rev = "v${version}"; | |
| rev = "refs/tags/v${version}"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, but "v${version}" could refer to a branch if one were created with that name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Upstream could also just force‐push a different tag pointer if they wanted to break things, right? Not objecting to the principle, just wondering if this has ever come up in practice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My concern is more about the ambiguity than the possibility of breaking stuff. If they wanted to guarantee a breakage, they could delete the repo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I remember this happening a long time ago with nickel.
But I think we should not be overzealous with this.
| @@ -55,23 +54,12 @@ llvmPackages_17.stdenv.mkDerivation (finalAttrs: { | |||
| src = fetchFromGitHub { | |||
| owner = "PCSX2"; | |||
| repo = "pcsx2"; | |||
| fetchSubmodules = true; | |||
| rev = "v${finalAttrs.version}"; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| rev = "v${finalAttrs.version}"; | |
| rev = "refs/tags/v${finalAttrs.version}"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the meaningful difference of adding refs/tags/ here? (Since v${version} works.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That refs/tags/ is not ambiguous, just using v${version} could also mean a branch.
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-already-reviewed/2617/1805 |
Description of changes
This includes work from @SuperSamus 's original PR (#322142) with the addition of
x86_64-darwinhash.Changes propagated from the previous PR:
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.