Liliana Marie Prikler <[email protected]> writes: > Am Montag, dem 29.05.2023 um 19:28 +0100 schrieb Christopher Baines: >> >> [email protected] writes: >> >> > This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. >> > >> > lilyp pushed a commit to branch master >> > in repository guix. >> > >> > The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this >> > push: >> > new 7ff003bcbf gnu: eudev: Use new package style. >> > 7ff003bcbf is described below >> > >> > commit 7ff003bcbf388677c7c85b1709c58f41f84b9947 >> > Author: Felix Lechner <[email protected]> >> > AuthorDate: Sun May 28 16:28:20 2023 -0700 >> > >> > gnu: eudev: Use new package style. >> > >> > * gnu/packages/linux.scm (eudev)[arguments]: Convert to list of >> > G-Expressions. >> > [native-inputs]: Drop labels. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Liliana Marie Prikler >> > <[email protected]> >> > --- >> > gnu/packages/linux.scm | 94 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- >> > ------------ >> > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) >> >> These changes do look to affect the derivation for eudev, and eudev >> also has too many dependents to update on the master branch. >> >> → guix refresh -l eudev >> Building the following 1913 packages would ensure 4138 dependent >> packages are rebuilt: ... > Should I revert it? Even with the mass rebuild, my intuition was that > it'd be okay since it's no functional change and core-updates was > dropped in favour of teams (with no particular team being responsible > for udev afaik).
I think there is disagreement about this (including at least some maintainers thinking differently), but I'm of the opinion that while there has been discussion about stopping using core-updates, people should follow the currently documented process, and for now that's still using staging/core-updates [1]. 1: https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Submitting-Patches.html#index-rebuild-scheduling-strategy As for reverting it, I'm somewhat indifferent. I'm more interested in the longer term cost of making changes like this than the temporary drops in substitute availability.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
