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.
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
gtk3: 3.24.21 -> 3.24.23 #100621
gtk3: 3.24.21 -> 3.24.23 #100621
Conversation
Does this miss the hash update? And I guess it is large enough to go to |
Hash update? Not sure what do you mean. Maybe large enough? |
> Does this miss the hash update? And I guess it is large enough to go to staging?
Hash update? Not sure what do you mean. Maybe large enough?
Nix verifies a secure hash of the source tarball after a download. These hashes are included in the expressions (usually in form `sha256="…";`), and they need to be updated when version is updated. The hash is, for example, printed if you apply `nix-prefetch-url` command-line tool to the URL of the new source tarball. (This will also add the tarball to your Nix store, so it does not need to be re-fetched when you proceed to check the build of the package)
|
Ah, I believe I did missed the hash update but how come the CI still passes? |
Well, build failures are different, and red status should be a definite «never merge», so build failures are neutral and need to be evaluated by humans. If you click through to the «Details» of builds, you will see a build failure. |
error output not helpful, I need to run |
```
wanted: sha256-rupq58016D38dpm+cWUZ+u/KNGxi54TdGjfZ35TAj1I=
got: sha256-XYZNJINXoiUVRbM4ezWULeX2bkxmAT8JYutctvja4rE=
```
error output not helpful, I need to run `nix-prefetch-url` to know what is it.
Well, the «got» line also contains a hash that was obtained, and which can be used to specify the hash in the Nix expression.
|
Updated |
@ofborg eval |
Please retarget to |
Also I would not expect lxsession being last released in February to depend on GTK released in August or September. |
It is not the lxsession that we already have, I am trying to package LXDE so this one may depend of gtk2 or gtk3 unlike the current one which only depends on gtk3 IIRC. |
Why would it make sense to depend on a library that has been deprecated for years now? Each configuration flag introduced to nixpkgs increases its complexity so it should be carefully weighted against the benefit it would bring. |
Because the gtk3 support is said to still have bugs, gtk2 is more stable. |
Closing because #98316 got merged. |
Motivation for this change
I got build errors when packaging lxsession, maybe it needs a newer gtk3? Still building on my side so I just send a patch first.
Things done
sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
./result/bin/
)nix path-info -S
before and after)