[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#43427] [PATCH] gnu: zstd: Update to 1.4.5.

From: Greg Hogan
Subject: [bug#43427] [PATCH] gnu: zstd: Update to 1.4.5.
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 07:22:52 -0400

Thanks, T-G-R. I will endeavor to tag for staging and core-updates going 
forward. Not sure how I missed the prior commit. I may have been looking among 
patches. Not sure how I missed the git log, and in the future I will be certain 
to simply check the latest version from each branch.

Would it be feasible to have `guix refresh` consider staging and core-updates 
when reporting available updates?


> On Sep 22, 2020, at 5:59 AM, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <> wrote:
> Greg,
> Mathieu Othacehe 写道:
>> The update is already present on core-updates branch,
> Sorry for the duplicate work!  How were you to've known this, you ask?
> $ guix refresh --list-dependent PACKAGE
> or ‘-l’ for short will list the number of rebuilds that a hash change in 
> PACKAGE would trigger.
> If it's higher than 300, the patch belongs on the ‘staging’ or ‘core-updates’ 
> branches instead of ‘master’.  The exact numbers are in the ‘Submitting 
> Patches’ section of the Guix manual.
> In practice, it's not always clear-cut.  A patch that rebuilds fewer than 300 
> packages but includes IceCat, Ungoogled Chromium, and LibreOffice probably 
> belongs on ‘staging’ regardless.  A patch that rebuilds 350 (fast-building) 
> Perl packages might be OK for master.
> It's good practice to include the branch name (e.g., ‘[PATCH core-updates]’) 
> when submitting patches not suitable for master.
> Kind regards,
> T G-R

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]