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

nano: Update script, test #103988

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 17, 2020
Merged

nano: Update script, test #103988

merged 2 commits into from Nov 17, 2020

Conversation

NeQuissimus
Copy link
Member

Motivation for this change
  • Add update script
  • Add test
Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@NeQuissimus NeQuissimus added the 6.topic: updaters Tooling for (semi-)automated updating of packages label Nov 16, 2020
@NeQuissimus NeQuissimus merged commit 0984125 into NixOS:master Nov 17, 2020
@NeQuissimus NeQuissimus deleted the nano_update branch November 17, 2020 17:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@joachifm joachifm Awaiting requested review from joachifm

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
6.topic: nixos 6.topic: updaters Tooling for (semi-)automated updating of packages 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 10.rebuild-linux: 0
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
1 participant
@NeQuissimus