<[email protected]> <[email protected]>) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>>The maintainer of btrfs-progs seems to be Michael Raskin. Michael, do >>>you have any opinion in this matter? >> >> I do run BtrFS on my notebook for most partitions and sometimes use >> BtrFS progs. I didn't update NixPkgs to latest git mostly because I >> didn't see if anyone else uses BtrFS (otherwise, it is not worth the >> discussion whether upstream bleeding edge is the right choice). >> >> Currently all allegedely unstable trees I know seem to work quite >> reliably. I would not bet on a sane tarball release in the upcoming >> month, so I can either apply a patch or just put my changes from >> configurations/ into the main tree. > >Waiting a little more is fine with me, upstream seems to be wrapping >up and working towards a stable release (maybe we will finally have >btrfsck :). They are working towards btrfsck for a few years now... I hope they don't hit another proof of Edward Shishkin being right in the process. >However, I do feel that packages that don't build (because their >source tarball isn't available anymore) are a concern. >It's nice to have binaries backing up most installs, but I would like >to be able to build from source no matter what. Could you link me a precise revision? I just don't use git, so I would prefer to apply a patch. Or I can commit what I use. >Does hydra keep mirrored copies of sources around for every binary it serves? >And I guess it won't build the same package every night if no inputs >change, so if sources become unavailable, won't maintainers notice? Hydra keeps sources for some time, but they are not GC-pinned. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
