rsbkb: patch time crate for Rust 1.80

[ProducerMatt]

Description of changes

Update to dodge #332957

Also remove rec because nix-tidyf complained.

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 333605 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• rsbkb

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• 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.

[emilazy]

Build looks fine, thanks!

[ProducerMatt]

Was I correct to base the PR against staging-next?

[emilazy]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 333605 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• rsbkb

Thanks!

Targeting staging-next is fine, but master would also have been fine. If staging-next had already merged, we’d have to retarget it on master. For something like this I would generally base it on and target master but use nixpkgs-review to check that it works rebased on top of the staging-next cycle with the breaking change.