| 11 Aug 2024 |
 qu4pk4 | * For example, the flake contains lots of packages, because I use it to build conditionally different versions. I went with a modular approach:
# flake.nix
{
...
packages = {
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
};
}
Which allows to run the packages like nix run '#pkg1.ver1' or 'nix run #pkg1.ver2'. Unfortunately, nix flake checkdoes not enter the nested attributes and that results innix flake check` failing.
| 16:42:45 |
| qu4pk4 | Is this a bad approach or can I instruct nix flake {show,check} dive into the attributes? | 16:43:42 |
| qu4pk4 | * For example, the flake contains lots of packages, because I use it to build conditionally different versions. I went with a modular approach:
# flake.nix
{
...
packages = {
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
};
}
Which allows to run the packages like nix run '#pkg1.ver1' or 'nix run #pkg1.ver2'. Unfortunately, nix flake checkdoes not enter the nested attributes and that results innix flake check` failing.
| 16:43:52 |
| qu4pk4 | * For example, the flake contains lots of packages, because I use it to build conditionally different versions. I went with a modular approach:
# flake.nix
{
...
packages = {
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
};
}
Which allows to run the packages like nix run '#pkg1.ver1' or 'nix run #pkg1.ver2'. Unfortunately, nix flake check does not enter the nested attributes and that results innix flake check` failing.
| 16:44:04 |
| qu4pk4 | * For example, the flake contains lots of packages, because I use it to build conditionally different versions. I went with a modular approach:
# flake.nix
{
...
packages = {
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
};
}
Which allows to run the packages like nix run '#pkg1.ver1' or nix run '#pkg1.ver2'. Unfortunately, nix flake check does not enter the nested attributes and that results innix flake check\ failing.
| 16:44:28 |
| qu4pk4 | * For example, the flake contains lots of packages, because I use it to build conditionally different versions. I went with a modular approach:
# flake.nix
{
...
packages = {
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
pkg1 = {
ver1 = { ... };
ver2 = { ... };
...
vern = { ... };
};
};
}
Which allows to run the packages like nix run '#pkg1.ver1' or nix run '#pkg1.ver2'. Unfortunately, nix flake check does not enter the nested attributes and that results innix flake check failing.
| 16:44:44 |
 emily | yeah you're not allowed to do that sorry | 17:27:36 |
| emily | sadly | 17:27:45 |
 Ronny | im wondering - are there any experiments on how to have a library system for derivations, dependencies and so on - preferably without suckering into pkgs.lib
im looking for stuff to make more easy autoupdaters, service specs, state management | 18:45:55 |
| qu4pk4 | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
yeah you're not allowed to do that sorry I mean, it works enough for my use case. :D | 20:00:59 |
| emily | well, it doesn't work for nix flake check :) | 20:01:34 |
| qu4pk4 | Is there a good reason, why it doesn't/cannot work? | 20:02:02 |
| qu4pk4 | My Flake is part of a research into libs/pkgs, so I am ok with it not fitting 100% into the infra. | 20:02:50 |
| qu4pk4 | Nix doesn't seem to be used much for supporting any version of lib, but the strictness and constraints feel like a good match for that use case. | 20:04:32 |
| qu4pk4 | Especially, for research reproduceability. | 20:04:52 |
| qu4pk4 | Another thing: installCheck phase is ran when doInstallCheck is set to true according to https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#var-stdenv-doInstallCheck, but not when cross-compiling. I can't get my installCheck phase to run in a flake that uses flake-utils. Is the cross-compiling kicking in? | 20:13:20 |
| qu4pk4 | I am building with nix build '#pkg.ver' therefore I am not really thinking I am cross-compiling. | 20:13:48 |
| emily | In reply to @qu4pk4:matrix.org
Is there a good reason, why it doesn't/cannot work? the schema forbids it. legacyPackages lets you put arbitrary data in, which is why Nixpkgs uses it | 20:15:37 |
 tomberek | qu4pk4: Eelco is working on a flake-schemas effort to make supporting various schemas in the the top-level outputs. Regardless, you can place a "lib" wherever you wish. Nixpkgs itself places "lib" output into the top-level of the flake. | 22:29:56 |
| 12 Aug 2024 |
| qu4pk4 | Thanks | 07:44:21 |
| qu4pk4 | How to use passthru.tests for testing Flake package builds? My idea is to build static libraries and tests that the lib<name>.a indeed exists by compiling a simple source. | 07:45:44 |
| qu4pk4 | But pkgs.runCommand used in https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#var-meta-tests-nixos does not result in a derivation and therefore both nix run and nix build complain. | 07:46:46 |
| qu4pk4 | Or are passthru.tests somehow ran automatically on nix bulid '.#<pkg>'? | 07:48:45 |
|  @amiablechief:matrix.org left the room. | 11:34:31 |
|  @kyub:matrix.org left the room. | 16:59:15 |
| 13 Aug 2024 |
|  nat changed their profile picture. | 15:06:42 |
| nat changed their display name from nat ⋆ ˚｡⋆୨୧˚ to nat. | 15:06:45 |
|  jul1u5 changed their display name from Julius Marozas to jul1u5. | 21:58:50 |
| 14 Aug 2024 |
|  peddie changed their profile picture. | 00:34:49 |
|  Frank Geusch changed their display name from Master Fudge to Frank Geusch. | 13:25:41 |
