nixos-option: rewrite as a nix script, 2nd try #369151
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
6.topic: nixos
|
CC @Mic92 @lf- @Aleksanaa @FireyFly @azuwis . |
|
@NixOS/nixpkgs-vet Can someone help me with the issue? |
13 tasks
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Simply remove the default value for |
|
I also backported #363967 to make sure that we are not breaking installer tests. |
thiagokokada
force-pushed
the
nixify-nixos-option-try2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ff1f59d to
06d8011
Compare
Interesting, getting the following errors in the
nixpkgs/nixos/tests/installer.nix Lines 738 to 740 in faf9ccd Would appreciate some help. |
|
Moving this PR to draft until I find some way to fix the NixOS tests, help would be appreciate. |
|
@thiagokokada I believe these installers have some build dependencies injected into the build closure so they can install nixos offline. You might have pushed some new dependencies that you now also have to add to make the test work. |
Yes, that much I know. What is not clear to me is where I need to add the new dependencies, and why e.g.: |
|
No |
|
Hm, the installer test is attempting to build a different |
|
Okay that actually sounds very much like the filesets thing then. But it doesn’t use filesets and doesn’t look like it depends on anything that does so I’m a bit confused. I’m a little worried it’s |
|
Yea, it's the This is sort of a variant of the chroot bug that afflicts filesets, because I used flakes and |
|
I think |
|
Yea, tested. |
This ports the functionality of the C++ nixos-option to a nix script (with a tiny shellscript for argument processing and invoking the nix script). Benefits compared to the native binary include no longer being tied to a specific nix version, generally improved maintainability and improved stability. The main tradeoff is that the C++ version would have better access to introspecting and reporting errors nicely, but that doesn't seem to have been the case in practice anyway. The other tradeoff is that we generate all the output at the end instead of streaming it as we traverse the option tree. Co-authored-by: Zhong Jianxin <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: aleksana <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: eclairevoyant <[email protected]>
thiagokokada
force-pushed
the
nixify-nixos-option-try2
branch
from
06d8011 to
f2d7d55
Compare
Done. Edit: run the tests locally, seems to be working now. Thanks @emilazy @ElvishJerricco. |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/5036 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replaces: #313497.
The only changes compared to the PR above:
pkgs/by-namenixosTests.installer.simpleUefiSystemdBootaspassthru.testssincenixos-optionfailure is a channel blocker: nixos-option: link to nixos test #363967Things done
nix.conf? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxedsandbox = truenix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.