I wasn’t aware of problems with channels updates, so could anyone explain in a few lines what was going on?
Some weeks ago I needed a more recent version of nixpkgs than the one that was available on the channel, so I picked the most successful evaluation of nixpkgs:trunc, checked it out locally and setup binary caches to point to hydra. Then I rebuilt my whole environment from this checkout and have been using it ever since. Now, when I heard that the channel was updated, I decided to give it a shot, updated channels and… nothing changed. So I checked the hashes and, turns out, the channel was updated to exactly the same commit that I was successfully using (i.e. nothing had to be built locally) for weeks. So, what exactly wasn’t working? On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 6:43 PM Domen Kožar <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, it's mainly about establishing the feedback loop without too much > spam. > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Peter Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > >> One obvious improvement, IMHO, would be to send Hydra failure >> notifications >> from the test job to this mailing list to make sure we are aware of >> failures >> within a relatively short time after the commit that caused them. >> >> Best regards, >> Peter >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nix-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > nix-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
