guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: 04/09: gnu: mesa: Update to 23.0.3.


From: Maxim Cournoyer
Subject: Re: 04/09: gnu: mesa: Update to 23.0.3.
Date: Mon, 08 May 2023 08:08:07 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi Christopher,

Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net> writes:

> guix-commits@gnu.org writes:
>
>> apteryx pushed a commit to branch master
>> in repository guix.
>>
>> commit 0be7838105806819f4586ec9130382a66a22880e
>> Author: Kaelyn Takata <kaelyn.alexi@protonmail.com>
>> AuthorDate: Thu May 4 20:12:46 2023 +0000
>>
>>     gnu: mesa: Update to 23.0.3.
>>
>>     * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa): Update to 23.0.3.
>>     [source]: Remove obsolete patch and update HTTPS url.
>>     [arguments]: Enable the crocus gallium driver.
>>     * gnu/packages/patches/mesa-fix-sporadic-test-failures.patch: Delete 
>> file.
>>     * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Remove it.
>> ---
>>  gnu/local.mk                                       |  1 -
>>  gnu/packages/gl.scm                                | 14 ++++-------
>>  .../patches/mesa-fix-sporadic-test-failures.patch  | 27 
>> ----------------------
>>  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> → guix refresh -l mesa
> Building the following 1954 packages would ensure 4257 dependent
> packages are rebuilt ...
>
>
> I know there's been some discussion about changing processes regarding
> changes like this that impact lots of packages, but as far as I'm aware,
> the documented process hasn't changed yet. So should this have gone to
> core-updates, and not been directly pushed to master?

There isn't currently a core-updates branch, and I need to spend some
time documenting the authorization process for how to create short lived
Cuirass branches.  I think ideally we would have created a
'graphics-team' or similar branch (even the team has yet to be formed)
and let it build.

Seeing the build machines were idling in the European night, I figured I
could get away with it for this time.

But the situation will repeat; I'd like to push some xorg updates that
fix a CVE; we'll nead a 'xorg-team' branch or similar.  Should we create
these branches from the maintenance repository (permanent branches) ?

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim



reply via email to

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