My lazyness led to this situation - I just wanted to add a list of patches into the post, I paste it from Gerrit without converson to simple text - hoping it won’t be tried out as links.
Well, I see, someone had to …
Anyway - I’m happy now that access has fixed, so anyone would feel the urging desire to test : is it working ? … for them it will work !..
2 additional patches were selected to Haiku base system :
Commit message (Expand)
Author
Age
Lines
*
Deskbar: Limit app bar width by BarMenuBar widthr1beta4
John Scipione
35 hours
-9/+6
*
threads.h: Fix value of ONCE_FLAG_INIT.
Augustin Cavalier
35 hours
-3/+2
Previously - in my similar post - I forgot to mention :
Webpositive also refreshed - just as now again
THEN FROM beta4_hrev56578_70-1 TO beta4_hrev56578_75-1 NOW FROM beta4_hrev56578_75-1 TO beta4_hrev56578_77-1
But to know what changed* under the hood you must wait till monthly report, as I could find omly one patch that has Webpositive in its title from 2023-02-10 and I would be really surprized that would not be included already. The otherts were earlier
(*)
Well, I used star at this ‘changed’,
as I may write after the following : (or not).
How I mean it ?.. I can imagine a scenario, when Jam tool automatically
gives the new revision number for all the given packages that default exists in its config
to renders altogether as new base OS ( so the kernel and others ) from source files - those even not all of them has or has not changes itself in their code.
So when Haiku revision number changes
then the packages - rendered altogether with new Haiku kernel -
has the same revision number in its package name
as the new Haiku kernel has.
This way maybe I would do like a puppy that impassionately chases his own tail
if I (would) search beyond for such changes of Webpositive
However maybe I wrong NOW and I will be corrected below
by someone who knows this better.
Indeed. I have moved the posts to the existing topic. I’m also not sure why these posts are useful at all, these are pretty boring bugfixes (as you’d expect in a beta branch).
Someone not ‘layman’ to taking care about their OS, but not everyday refresh packages … however he may await for an issue to be resolved … possibly even do not report/complain/etc. – but would like to know about.
As I’m curious and do some checks … I was not lazy to transfer such info to them. I understand it can irritate such data/info who meets with every turn at their Haiku activities.
However - from my side I’ve stopped doing it - I would rather avoid to be divisive in such small stuff (as someone seems liked and someone not liked).
