|
From: | Vivien Kraus |
Subject: | [bug#55703] [PATCH] Update minetest |
Date: | Sun, 05 Jun 2022 10:36:28 +0200 |
User-agent: | Evolution 3.42.1 |
Hello, Le dimanche 29 mai 2022 à 18:39 +0200, Liliana Marie Prikler a écrit : > > > + (source > > + (origin > > + (inherit (package-source irrlicht)) > > + (method git-fetch) > > + (uri (git-reference > > + (url "https://github.com/minetest/irrlicht") > > + (commit version))) > > + (sha256 > > + (base32 > > + "1jxk1x0f60n8lrz8a6x62aj2pqg0qnbajsld3lqncvwsfbi0xjx1")) > > + (patches '()) > > + (snippet '(begin #t)))) > Instead of inheriting and blanking patches and snippet, you could > simply not inherit. That is simpler, yes. > > > + (arguments > > + `(#:tests? #f)) > As with Irrlicht itself, you should write out "; no check target" Yes. > > > > > * gnu/packages/minetest.scm (minetest-basic-materials): Update to > > > > 2022-03-28 (commet 9d55f991…). > > > > [snippet]: Make sound_api_core a dependency, not a submodule. > > > Again doing two things at once. I think it'd be wiser to first do > > > the updates, then add minetest-sound-core, then add the snippets. > > > WDYT? > > > > minetest-sound-core is introduced as a submodule for the > > basic_materials update. So the code for it is not present at all. > > If > > I first update basic_materials, then the tests will fail because it > > can’t find sound_core. Do you mean that I should first try to respect > > the will of the author and add it as a submodule (I don’t know how to > > do that) and then take it out as a separate package? > Hmm, perhaps I was confused by the commit message. If changes to the > package are necessary for the bump, it makes sense to do them in the > same commit as you did, but the wording would imply that it was > previously a submodule, which perhaps through strange git magic is no > longer available in the source (because it has been externalized). I rewrote the comment and linked to the basic_material issue mentioned by Maxime elsewhere in the thread: https://github.com/mt-mods/basic_materials/issues/4 > > > > ² As pointed out by Maxime elsewhere in the mailing list, > > > Minetest packages usually have flaky tags in their forges, so > > > someone needs to look closer at whether this is going to break in > > > the future. > > > > Yes. Mesecons was using version numbers and then the latest tag is > > a > > date. Given that it’s April 1st, maybe there’s something funny > > occuring here, but the changes around that day looked reasonable to > > my untrained eye. However, one thing I didn’t notice at first was > > the > > drop of the + in the license. Sorry. > I'm not sure whether that's the right version to bump to, sorry. > According to ContentDB the latest release is > 27c3c515b49af91c1dbc427f31a820722854eb24, but that's untagged in git; > I > suggest either making a git-version and adding an appropriate comment > or contacting upstream for clarification. Obviously yes that’s the commit to use. So now the v3 looks like this. What do you think? Vivien
v3-0001-gnu-minetest-Add-irrlicht-for-minetest.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0002-gnu-minetest-Update-to-5.5.1.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0003-gnu-minetest-Add-minetest-sound-api-core.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0004-gnu-minetest-basic-materials-Update-to-2022-03-28.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0005-gnu-minetest-homedecor-modpack-Update-to-2022-05-.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0006-gnu-minetest-mesecons-Update-to-2022-04-01.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0007-gnu-minetest-mineclone-Update-to-0.75.0.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0008-gnu-minetest-technic-Update-to-2022-02-06.patch
Description: Text Data
v3-0009-gnu-minetest-advtrains-Update-to-2.4.1.patch
Description: Text Data
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |