Sender | Message | Time |
---|---|---|
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:
Which allows to run the packages like | 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:
Which allows to run the packages like | 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:
Which allows to run the packages like | 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:
Which allows to run the packages like | 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:
Which allows to run the packages like | 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.orgI 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.orgthe 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 |