Skip to content

Conversation

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor

@ndpm13 ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

Testing the changes

  • I tested the changes in this PR: briefly

Local build testing

  • I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (x86_64-glibc)

@chrysos349

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

  • I tested the changes in this PR: NO

Loupe needs to be updated.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

  • I tested the changes in this PR: NO

You should test PRs before submitting them. As-is this breaks loupe.

even when the PR is a draft?

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

even when the PR is a draft?

Ideally, yes. It should be tested locally along with its dependents first.
Draft just means "don't merge" which can be the case for a variety of reasons.

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

even when the PR is a draft?

Ideally, yes. It should be tested locally along with its dependents first. Draft just means "don't merge" which can be the case for a variety of reasons.

Noted 👍

@ndpm13
Copy link
Contributor Author

ndpm13 commented Jan 9, 2026

Also if the loupe thing is gonna be a problem should I just make this glycin-2 ?

@oreo639
Copy link
Member

oreo639 commented Jan 9, 2026

Also if the loupe thing is gonna be a problem should I just make this glycin-2 ?

No, in this case loupe should be updated in this PR.
Although, I assume glycin 2.x will also break fractal which should also be updated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants