netbox: 4.1.3 -> 4.1.10

[bzadm]

Update to latest 4.1.10 version, it should be noted that a testing version for 4.2 is already available.

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 (.#netbox.passthru.tests.netbox
• 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/)
• 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 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.

Supersedes #366765

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[bzadm]

On an unrelated note, I noticed that django-rich was introduced as a dependency in netbox 4 but isn't packaged in nixpkgs nor contained in the dependencies for the netbox derivation. It obviously works without it, but why was it skipped?

[bzadm]

Reverting to draft, 4.10 requires a thorough update of dependencies. At least django-rq (due to rq) had major version bump with breaking changes.

[bzadm]

An overview of where nixpkgs is and what netbox requires (satisfied-ish versions were skipped):

Dependency	netbox requirement	nixpkgs master	note
django-rq	3.0	2.10.1	This is due to rq v2, which is breaking.
django-cors-headers	4.6.0	4.4.0	Not breaking but out of date
django-htmx	1.19.0	1.21.0	likely not important
django-taggit	6.1.0	5.0.1
drf-spectacular	0.28.0	0.27.2	This adds some django 5.1 support based on the release notes
drf-spectacular-sidecar	2024.12.1	2023.9.1
nh3	0.2.20	0.2.17	only on develop, 4.1.10.
strawberry-graphql	0.254.0	0.253.1	only on develop, not 4.1.10
strawberry-django	0.52.0	0.47.1	only on develop, not 4.1.10
tablib	3.7.0	3.6.1

edit: updates for requirements.txt on tag v4.1.10

[bzadm]

The patch for Django 5.1 also requires an adjustment for the new requirements.txt, fun. I've included all dependency updates in this PR, this can be split into multiple PRs if required.

[bzadm]

cc maintainers of affected packages: @Izorkin @minijackson @RaitoBezarius @mweinelt @happysalada

[happysalada]

Lgtm

[minijackson]

Thanks a lot! There are quite a few packages that fail during nixpkgs-review (which I didn't manage to finish, my laptop run out of memory).

I'm also not quite sure if we should be doing separate rq2 and django-rq3 packages, this method is usually reserved if all versions are supported upstream. This could lead to other packges using outdated / unsupported dependencies versions. Tagging @mweinelt for guidance and as maintainer of the django-rq packages and other Python packages.

I can confirm that NetBox tests passes, though!

[bzadm]

@minijackson thank you for trying to get nixpkgs-review running. My PC did not finish it either. It appears this touches at least a few hundred packages, likely due to rq etc., and will be quite hefty rebuild.

For at least netbox I can now also confirm that this works with plug-ins (except netbox-documents, checks appear broken) in a full deployment. I updated an existing 4.1.3 instance to 4.1.10 without issues.

For rq2/django-rq3 my main concern is that other upstream netbox versions like 4.0.x and 3.x relay on rq 1.x. They are supposedly breaking API changes and at least netbox 4.0.x relies on rq 1.x (though maybe it can work with v2, idk).

[bzadm]

netbox has released 4.2.0 and 4.2.1 today. Should I close this PR in favor of updating to 4.2.x directly?

[minijackson]

I'd normally say that packaging 4.1.10 is still useful to backport to 24.11, but it seems even 4.1.10 might prove difficult to backport…

[bzadm]

Okay, then I will close this PR for now and refactore it for 4.2.1. As far as I can tell this should mostly be just a version bump (for packaging) and some more testing.

I will also spin off the approved changes for the python dependencies into their own MRs.

[bzadm]

Superseded by #376100