[Backport release-24.05] slskd: 0.21.3 -> 0.21.4

[melvyn2]

Manual backport of #344958, needed as 2641d97 isn't present in release-24.05.

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• 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/)
• 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 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
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[melvyn2]

An expected failure since merge conflicts had to be resolved.

[fpletz]

The test suite seems to fail on x86_64-linux on ofborg.

[melvyn2]

I'm not sure how exactly to troubleshoot this: the exact same derivation (/nix/store/dgfwg97aqgabsncyk8fi00k0px1j0gnh-slskd-0.21.4.drv) builds completely normally with all tests passing on my machine.

[melvyn2]

@ofborg eval

[melvyn2]

@ofborg build slskd

[getchoo]

I'm not sure how exactly to troubleshoot this: the exact same derivation (/nix/store/dgfwg97aqgabsncyk8fi00k0px1j0gnh-slskd-0.21.4.drv) builds completely normally with all tests passing on my machine.

Most likely a flakey test. Seems to be good enough for Ofborg now though and it hasn't been replicated in Hydra yet, so this may be good to merge? But I'd recommend disabling the test(s?) responsible here and in master at some point regardless