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

recaf: init at 4.0-unstable-2024-12-11 #350589

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nartsisss
Copy link
Member

@nartsisss nartsisss commented Oct 23, 2024

Recaf - modern Java bytecode editor
image

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 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.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@ofborg ofborg bot added 8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1 labels Oct 23, 2024
@nartsisss nartsisss force-pushed the init-recaf branch 7 times, most recently from 7d6231d to 1167816 Compare October 27, 2024 00:16
@nartsisss nartsisss marked this pull request as ready for review October 27, 2024 12:05
@nixos-discourse
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/4755

@pluiedev
Copy link
Contributor

Does this still evaluate after #344544? If not, then you might need to do the same hacks as I did over in #354184

@nartsisss
Copy link
Member Author

nartsisss commented Nov 10, 2024

@pluiedev I tested it on aarch64 (both darwin & linux), and according to the logs from Ofborg, everything is fine on x86_64 as well.

image

@pluiedev
Copy link
Contributor

I tested it on aarch64 (both darwin & linux), and according to the logs from Ofborg, everything is fine on x86_64 as well.

Try rebasing as you're about 10k commits behind master :p

@nartsisss
Copy link
Member Author

I tested it on aarch64 (both darwin & linux), and according to the logs from Ofborg, everything is fine on x86_64 as well.

Try rebasing as you're about 10k commits behind master :p

You're right. Rebased and applied your java-23-instead-of-22.patch. Works fine now

image

pkgs/by-name/re/recaf/package.nix Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkgs/by-name/re/recaf/package.nix Show resolved Hide resolved
@nartsisss nartsisss force-pushed the init-recaf branch 2 times, most recently from e8b4f95 to 09c2a16 Compare November 11, 2024 05:36
@nartsisss nartsisss changed the title recaf: init at 4.0.0 recaf: init at 4.0.0-unstable Nov 11, 2024
@C0D3-M4513R
Copy link
Contributor

Addresses: #267124

@nartsisss nartsisss changed the title recaf: init at 4.0.0-unstable recaf: init at 4.0-unstable-2024-12-11 Dec 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1 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.

5 participants