| 25 Jan 2022 |
Zhaofeng Li | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.de Is there a way to pass the flake inputs on to all machine configs? I'd like to do things like imports = [ "${inputs.nixos-mailserver}/default.nix" ]; in my machine configs. You can pass the inputs using either meta.specialArgs.inputs = inputs; or _module.args.inputs = inputs; in a node config | 18:27:23 |
Zhaofeng Li | Then inputs will be available as a NixOS module parameter. You can also go the overlays way, though. | 18:28:09 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | In reply to @zhaofeng:zhaofeng.li You can pass the inputs using either meta.specialArgs.inputs = inputs; or _module.args.inputs = inputs; in a node config I tried the latter, it resulted in infinite recursion in combination with imports = [ inputs.nixos-mailserver ]; | 19:36:43 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | maybe specialArgs doesn't have that problem though? I'll give it a try | 19:36:59 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | also, a feature I'd like in colmena: the ability to pass in nixos evaluations rather than nixos configs. That would open up a lot of possibilities, including a nixus-like system where the whole deployment can be made of nixos modules too. Not sure if that goes within the "vision" of colmena though, and if not that's fine --- I don't want colmena to succumb to feature creep either :) | 19:48:12 |
| ma27 joined the room. | 22:52:02 |
| 26 Jan 2022 |
Zhaofeng Li | In reply to @github:maunium.net [zhaofengli/colmena] JCapucho opened
issue
#50: Nixpkgs fails to build on unstable
Hi, I'm using colmena with a flake to build a node that uses the nixos-unstable branch of nixpkgs (commit is https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/689b76bcf36055afdeb2e9852f5ecdd2bf483f87), but it's failing to build.
In the start of the log I see a warning with
capucho-nixos | trace: warning: The following Nixpkgs configuration keys set in meta.nixpkgs will be ignored: path
Which leads me to believe that the issue might be caused by ignoring the path attribute introduced in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/153594
Here's the log of running colmena build --show-trace --verbose
log.txt
For those using Colmena with nixpkgs unstable, have you encountered problems related to split doc builds? If so, could you test if the current main and this 0.2 backport branch fix the problem? | 02:22:33 |
Zhaofeng Li | Admittedly I ran into the problem a couple of weeks ago in my setup when I rebased against master, but there were comments about it blocking the channel so I disabled it locally without looking closer. Then I kind of forgot about it 🙁 | 02:24:54 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.de maybe specialArgs doesn't have that problem though? I'll give it a try same problem :/ | 07:39:34 |
Zhaofeng Li | What does your imports looks like? | 07:50:22 |
Zhaofeng Li | * What does your imports look like? | 07:50:33 |
Zhaofeng Li | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.de I tried the latter, it resulted in infinite recursion in combination with imports = [ inputs.nixos-mailserver ]; Oh right, you probably want inputs.nixos-mailserver.nixosModule | 07:50:50 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | { config, pkgs, inputs, ... }:
{
imports =
[
inputs.nixos-mailserver.nixosModule
];
| 08:29:28 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | also causes infinite recursion | 08:29:36 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | I believe this is because inputs depends on the closure of nixos modules in the system, but the closure of nixos modules depends on inputs (because inputs is used right there in imports). | 08:30:24 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | inputs would have to be passed in "from outside" and can't be defined within a module. | 08:30:40 |
@github:maunium.net | [zhaofengli/colmena] JCapucho closed
issue
#50: Nixpkgs fails to build on unstable | 09:37:44 |
| Willi Butz joined the room. | 09:43:16 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.de also, a feature I'd like in colmena: the ability to pass in nixos evaluations rather than nixos configs. That would open up a lot of possibilities, including a nixus-like system where the whole deployment can be made of nixos modules too. Not sure if that goes within the "vision" of colmena though, and if not that's fine --- I don't want colmena to succumb to feature creep either :) Willi Butz: ^ | 09:47:12 |
Willi Butz | In reply to @zhaofeng:zhaofeng.li Admittedly I ran into the problem a couple of weeks ago in my setup when I rebased against master, but there were comments about it blocking the channel so I disabled it locally without looking closer. Then I kind of forgot about it 🙁 I did the exact same thing. I'll check the fix later today | 10:11:44 |
@github:maunium.net | [zhaofengli/colmena] zhaofengli reopened
issue
#50: Nixpkgs fails to build on unstable | 14:51:41 |
@github:maunium.net | [zhaofengli/colmena] zhaofengli pinned
issue
#50: Nixpkgs fails to build on unstable | 15:00:27 |
@github:maunium.net | [zhaofengli/colmena] zhaofengli published v0.2.1: v0.2.1 - Fix sandboxed documentation build on unstable | 15:24:29 |
Zhaofeng Li | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.de also, a feature I'd like in colmena: the ability to pass in nixos evaluations rather than nixos configs. That would open up a lot of possibilities, including a nixus-like system where the whole deployment can be made of nixos modules too. Not sure if that goes within the "vision" of colmena though, and if not that's fine --- I don't want colmena to succumb to feature creep either :) I thought more about it, and don't think it's a good idea since the deployment options are version-specific and Colmena depends on the structure to deserialize it correctly. Colmena should be self-contained, and confusing errors can easily occur if we allow people to "bring their own deployment options" which is required if you want to pass in an evaluated config directly.
Exposing the deployment option module for external use is fine, but Colmena should use its own when it's the one running the deployment.
| 17:25:17 |
Linux Hackerman is moving: @linus:schreibt.jetzt | In reply to @zhaofeng:zhaofeng.li
I thought more about it, and don't think it's a good idea since the deployment options are version-specific and Colmena depends on the structure to deserialize it correctly. Colmena should be self-contained, and confusing errors can easily occur if we allow people to "bring their own deployment options" which is required if you want to pass in an evaluated config directly.
Exposing the deployment option module for external use is fine, but Colmena should use its own when it's the one running the deployment. Fair enough. I managed to hammer the proverbial square peg into the round hole by setting config.system.build = lib.mkForce ...; but that's really not the direction I want to go in :D I think I'll try and represent my use case with colmena's code then, but not with a view to upstreaming it | 17:46:15 |
Willi Butz | In reply to @willi:butz.cloud I did the exact same thing. I'll check the fix later today I verified that it's fixed on v0.2.1.
had to comment out buildOnTarget though :> | 18:41:44 |
Zhaofeng Li | In reply to @willi:butz.cloud
I verified that it's fixed on v0.2.1.
had to comment out buildOnTarget though :> Great, thanks for testing! | 18:42:41 |
Willi Butz | Thanks for colmena! 🎉 | 18:44:55 |
@github:maunium.net | [zhaofengli/colmena] zhaofengli unpinned
issue
#11: Flake support | 18:47:03 |
| Jane Jasperous joined the room. | 22:27:14 |