>> 1 not sure if 0.8.0.3 is relevant on linux >> 1 patch OK >> 2 hard to say >> 2 not linked on homepage >> 3 build failure >> 11 patch ok >> 12 build pending >> 23 irrelevant >> 29 no patch >> >> >What does "no patch" mean? (a new release without a patch or a tarball >makes no sense)
We know some other distribution has a newer version but cannot automatically patch out expression to fetch the new tarball. >"irrelevant" could be baked into monitor.nixos.org, if it is non-security >related. These should be just ignored — some of these are trivial to automate. >"not linked on homepage" means that monitor.nixos.org missed it? No, it misses way more. There are multiple packages where some distributions package versions not acknowledged by software's homepage. Think gcc-2.96, but with less critical software. >"hard to say"?? Looking at two versions it is not always obvious if the package is newer. I didn't want to spend inordinate effort but I didn't want to hide throwing data out. >It seems like you have 3 "build failures" and 2 "not linked on homepage" >that could not be automated. Am I reading your numbers correctly? Nope, our real problem is 30 «no patch» + 3 build failures + (expected) 3 out of 12 pending builds failing — vs. 12 patch OK + (expected) 9 more patches from pending builds. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
