| 9 Dec 2025 |
 John Ericson | it was just "shotgun parsing" in LocalDerivationGoal | 16:56:30 |
| John Ericson | was there an error? | 16:56:36 |
 Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
my guess that it never parsed the nulls, but also back then it wasn't making a data structure It also failed to build the derivation with a message like expected a list | 16:56:53 |
| John Ericson | huh ok | 16:57:08 |
| Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | derivation-show also | 16:57:16 |
| John Ericson | so Nixpkgs has just been wrong this whole time? | 16:57:17 |
| John Ericson | nix derivation show made an error? | 16:57:47 |
| Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
so Nixpkgs has just been wrong this whole time? I guess so. I can double check since a was doing that in a rush this morning, but I tested 2.4’s show-derivation and building too. | 16:58:14 |
| John Ericson | I would not expect 2.4 to make an error about this since the parsing is in the builder | 16:58:50 |
| John Ericson | but maybe you just meant you checked what the derivation looked like? | 16:59:04 |
| John Ericson | (in case it was a nix language -> parsing issue?) | 16:59:24 |
 Taeer Bar-Yam | It seems like nixpkgs has been "wrong", but for some reason that I still can't figure out, it does work what they're doing (in the case of __structuredAttrs = false;) | 17:08:03 |
| John Ericson | that null becomes the empty string? | 17:08:55 |
| John Ericson | so structured attrs true was always broken, but not structured attrs false? | 17:09:17 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | No. null becomes empty string in my own example that i cooked up, not using inputDerivation. In that case it fails to build.
inputDerivation somehow gets rid of allowedReferences, despite setting it to null, and it succeeds to build
| 17:09:54 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | I think so | 17:10:12 |
| John Ericson | OK so I was fixing the wrong branch :) | 17:10:35 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | honestly both branches seem broken | 17:11:19 |
| John Ericson | code branch | 17:11:23 |
| John Ericson | oh? | 17:11:25 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | even if nixpkgs is somehow getting away with it, it's still true that just setting allowedReferences = null; in a derivation that references something will fail | 17:12:06 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | at least it does when I try it | 17:12:25 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | I don't know what I'm doing differently than nixpkgs 😭 | 17:12:33 |
| John Ericson | Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium): https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/14754 I made this one with just the cleanup, and a warning for when exportReferencesGraph is not an object as we expect | 17:45:03 |
| John Ericson | and ^ Taeer Bar-Yam | 17:45:18 |
| Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium): https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/14754 I made this one with just the cleanup, and a warning for when exportReferencesGraph is not an object as we expect Have you been able to repro with 2.4 / other versions too? | 17:46:23 |
| Taeer Bar-Yam | I'm super braindead right now, but I'll try to take a look this week | 17:46:36 |
| John Ericson | that PR is suppose to have 0 behavioral changes outside of diagnostics | 17:46:45 |
| John Ericson | not supposed to help or hurt 25.11 | 17:46:58 |
| Sergei Zimmerman (xokdvium) | In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
that PR is suppose to have 0 behavioral changes outside of diagnostics For the next release cycle then since it’s a refactor | 17:47:22 |
