mesa: 22.1.4 -> 22.1.5

[PedroHLC]

Description of changes

1. Bump changes: https://docs.mesa3d.org/relnotes/22.1.5.html

2. Moved patches (that were already using SRI hashes), I've adopted what the wiki calls the preferred way.

3. Added the fix for https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/issues/6519 as a patch (for darwin only).

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandbox = true set in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• 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/)
• 22.11 Release Notes (or backporting 22.05 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
  • (Release notes changes) Ran nixos/doc/manual/md-to-db.sh to update generated release notes
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[vcunat]

Are you sure that the darwin fixes have been included in 22.1.5? I haven't noticed them in the release notes.

[PedroHLC]

Are you sure that the darwin fixes have been included in 22.1.5? I haven't noticed them in the release notes.

I somehow looked the wrong tag, reverting this...

[vcunat]

SRI: I like to simply paste the hash published on https homepages (example), but I don't really mind.

[PedroHLC]

SRI: I like to simply paste the hash published on https homepages (example), but I don't really mind.

Indeed, that's easier. Reverted...

Instead of keeping the darwin friends outdated, I pulled the fix as a patch, seems fine right? Will ask a colleague to build it...

[PedroHLC]

@ofborg build mesa

[vcunat]

That most likely won't work, because the staging rebuilds are normally very large. (and ofborg tries to merge with newest version of the target branch)

[vcunat]

I only see a failure on aarch64-darwin, though an unrelated one.

[PedroHLC]

@ofborg build mesa

[PedroHLC]

Successful builds in both aarch64 and x86_64 for darwin, against unstable:

• x86_64: https://logs.nix.ci/?key=nixos/nixpkgs.185699&attempt_id=7629ae3a-b87f-4e86-9fc7-343028f035ba
• aarch64: https://logs.nix.ci/?key=nixos/nixpkgs.185699&attempt_id=deb5f7c8-fb0d-4a36-9db7-ae9cfb1678a2

I should have run the tests instead of package in ofborg...

[PedroHLC]

@vcunat what do you recommend me to deal with this? Keep the darwin patch (which builds, but I can't test), or revert and just push the bump?

PS: Meanwhile, the "No channel PR" won't re-trigger in the right target.

[vcunat]

It sounds good to me this way. I think we've never tested mesa for *-darwin beyond building stuff.

[superherointj]

On linux-x86_64, mesa builds for me. I cannot test for downstream breakage as it's staging. Merging this would be good to let hydra test it fully. Seems good to me for this purpose. If someone else (@vcunat maybe?) approves this, I'd be fine merging this.

[vcunat]

Hydra doesn't test much relevant things, and staging branch normally isn't built (immediately). But getting further, into the the next staging-next iteration will create binaries and allow easier testing by people. Either way, patch bumps like this one shouldn't be problematic.

[vcunat]

Let's skip to 22.1.6?
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-announce/2022-August/000683.html

[PedroHLC]

22.1.6

In another, less noised PR.