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.

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

racket racket-minimal: 7.2 -> 7.3 #61587

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

racket racket-minimal: 7.2 -> 7.3 #61587

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

clacke
Copy link
Contributor

@clacke clacke commented May 16, 2019

Motivation for this change

Racket 7.3 released

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • 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 nix-review --run "nix-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)
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@bricewge
Copy link
Contributor

PR #61584 is the same as yours.

@marsam
Copy link
Contributor

marsam commented May 18, 2019

addressed by #61584

@marsam marsam closed this May 18, 2019
@clacke
Copy link
Contributor Author

clacke commented May 20, 2019

Curse you, @geistesk! ;-)

Thank, you, I'll keep a better eye out for duplication next time.

@clacke clacke deleted the racket73 branch May 20, 2019 02:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@clacke @bricewge @marsam