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

pipewire: 0.3.33 -> 0.3.34 #135819

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2021
Merged

pipewire: 0.3.33 -> 0.3.34 #135819

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2021

Conversation

Kranzes
Copy link
Member

@Kranzes Kranzes commented Aug 26, 2021

Motivation for this change
  1. Updated package to the latest version
  2. Imported the latest json configs into the module
  3. Ran nixpkgs-fmt on the expression
Things done
  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandbox = true set in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all packages 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/)
  • 21.11 Release Notes (or backporting 21.05 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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added 6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` labels Aug 26, 2021
@Kranzes Kranzes mentioned this pull request Aug 26, 2021
12 tasks
@jansol jansol mentioned this pull request Aug 26, 2021
5 tasks
@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from jtojnar August 26, 2021 17:47
@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: 101-500 labels Aug 26, 2021
@r-rmcgibbo
Copy link

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 135819 at 70de7b5 run on aarch64-linux 1

2 packages marked as broken and skipped:
  • easyeffects
  • obs-studio-plugins.obs-ndi
26 packages failed to build:
67 packages skipped due to time constraints:
  • adapta-gtk-theme
  • adoptopenjdk-icedtea-web
  • empathy (gnome.empathy)
  • fast-cli
  • firefox-esr-78-unwrapped (firefoxPackages.firefox-esr-78)
  • firefox-esr-91-unwrapped (firefoxPackages.firefox-esr-91)
  • xulrunner (firefox-unwrapped)
  • gnome.gnome-contacts
  • gnome.gnome-control-center (gnome.gnome_control_center)
  • gnome.gnome-terminal (gnome.gnome_terminal)
  • ...

Note that build failures may predate this PR, and could be nondeterministic or hardware dependent.
Please exercise your independent judgement. Does something look off? Please file an issue or reach out on IRC.

, ffmpegSupport ? true, ffmpeg ? null
, bluezSupport ? true, bluez ? null, sbc ? null, libfreeaptx ? null, ldacbt ? null, fdk_aac ? null
, gstreamerSupport ? true
, gst_all_1 ? null
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we really need ? null for all optional dependencies?
They are available by callPackage and are lazy evaluated.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm fairly sure that is just a "that's just how it has always been done" case. At least for me it has, it was that way for existing optional deps so I used the same pattern for the ones I added.

@archseer
Copy link
Member

archseer commented Sep 1, 2021

Can we get this merged? It resolves a few critical regressions on 0.3.33.

@flexagoon
Copy link
Contributor

@jtojnar could you please review this?

@jtojnar jtojnar merged commit 1c49627 into NixOS:master Sep 1, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 1, 2021

Successfully created backport PR #136392 for release-21.05.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` 10.rebuild-darwin: 11-100 10.rebuild-linux: 101-500 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants