 | Nix Documentation | 399 Members |
| Discussion about documentation improvements around the Nix ecosystem | 79 Servers |
| Nix Documentation | 399 Members |
| Discussion about documentation improvements around the Nix ecosystem | 79 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Jul 2021 | ||
 David Arnold (blaggacao) | * Have we considered ```markdown [`foo(5)`][] ⋮ [`foo(5)`]: http://b.org ``` ? | 11:17:56 |
 Jan Tojnar | David Arnold: Interesting, did not realize that the implicit link names were already part of the original Markdown. | 12:30:37 |
| Jan Tojnar | Though linking by “form” feels kind of backwards to me – the empty link text being filled in from the link target automatically is intuitive for me; magically guessing link target from link label feels weird. Granted, I was never fan of reference-style links. | 12:30:40 |
| Jan Tojnar | In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.orgThis syntax would currently require concating all md files with the mapping (just like the [][foo(5)] syntax) but resolving would be slightly cleaner – just replace the Str "[", Code …, Str "][]" sequence in AST by Code … (for the links that did not resolve). | 12:34:43 |
 bryan | Jan Tojnar: what you ask for is what happens with no syntax whatsoever, isn't it? :) A bare url is automatically converted to a link? | 12:48:50 |
| Jan Tojnar | bryan: not sure I understand – we would have manpage references and the mapping would contain URLs only for some of them | 12:51:28 |
| Jan Tojnar | or do you mean this bare url syntax <man:foo(5)>? That would be nice alternative too IMO. | 12:55:32 |
| bryan | Ah my mistake. I thought you were talking about actual urls | 13:02:56 |
 ryantm | It's too bad the [foo(5)][] looks so ugly when there is no link available. | 13:15:23 |
| ryantm | * It's too bad the [\foo(5)`][]` looks so ugly when there is no link available. | 13:15:39 |
| ryantm | * It's too bad the ` | 13:15:57 |
| ryantm | * It's too bad the looks so ugly when there is no link available. | 13:16:13 |
| 14 Jul 2021 | ||
 pixelfog | I'm looking for recommendations on how to view old versions of the nixpkgs manual, e.g. 18.09. I tried building it from my own checkout, but I can't build the 18.09 version of the manual with the 21.05 version of nix-build. I tried to build the 18.09 manual with the 18.09 version of nix-build, but I haven't figured out how to do that. | 18:03:27 |
| ryantm | pixelfog: Why do you want to build it? | 20:22:33 |
| ryantm | Redacted or Malformed Event | 20:23:13 |
| ryantm | * ~~By default, the NixOS manual gets built every time you build NixOS, so if you have a system on 18.09 it should have the manual lying around in the nix store.~~ Edit: oops you said nixpkgs manual. | 20:23:33 |
| ryantm | * | 20:23:42 |
| 15 Jul 2021 | ||
| pixelfog | In reply to @ryantm:matrix.org I don't necessarily want to build it. I just want to view it. I had been looking at the nixos.org/manual documentation, but I was confused by the "packages" attribute that was being passed to nix-shell. I couldn't see how it was being used. Eventually, I figured out that it hadn't been added to nixpkgs until May 2021. So it seems like being able to view the documentation that matches the nixpkgs commit I'm using would be a good idea. As to why I'm using 18.09, it's because I have some Python2.7 code that runs fine on Ubuntu 18.04, and I'd like to package it for Nix before I port it to python3. So I picked 18.09 because it's around the same age as Ubuntu 18.04, and presumably would have roughly similar library versions. | 00:06:44 |
| pixelfog | In reply to @ryantm:matrix.org* I don't necessarily want to build it. I just want to view it. I had been looking at the nixos.org/manual documentation, but I was confused by the "packages" attribute that was in the nix-shell examples in the manual. I couldn't see how it was being used. Eventually, I figured out that it hadn't been added to nixpkgs until May 2021. So it seems like being able to view the documentation that matches the nixpkgs commit I'm using would be a good idea. As to why I'm using 18.09, it's because I have some Python2.7 code that runs fine on Ubuntu 18.04, and I'd like to package it for Nix before I port it to python3. So I picked 18.09 because it's around the same age as Ubuntu 18.04, and presumably would have roughly similar library versions. | 00:07:52 |
| pixelfog | If there's a place that has the old versions of the manuals, already built, that would be completely sufficient for my purposes. | 00:09:12 |
| ryantm | Seems kind of likely they are in the Internet Archive, but I don't know what URL they are at. | 00:10:01 |
| ryantm | Here's the 18.03 manual http://web.archive.org/web/20180612014125/https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/index.html | 00:11:24 |
| pixelfog | Hmm...good point. | 00:11:40 |
| pixelfog | In reply to @ryantm:matrix.orgThanks! | 00:11:50 |
| 20 Jul 2021 | ||
 ldesgoui joined the room. | 14:36:53 | |
| 22 Jul 2021 | ||
 Linux Hackerman | pixelfog: you can also build the manual for your exact nixpkgs version by running nix-build path/to/nixpkgs/doc | 17:28:50 |
| pixelfog | In reply to @linus.heckemann:matrix.mayflower.deLinux Hackerman: I'll attach a screenshot of what happens when I try to build the 18.09 docs using 20.09 tools. | 18:57:49 |
| pixelfog | Download building_nix_docs.png | 18:58:16 |
| Linux Hackerman | pixelfog: huh, works for me. You're on 6a3f5bcb061e1822f50e299f5616a0731636e4e7 with no changes? | 19:20:42 |
| Linux Hackerman | oh right, I'm on 21.05, not 20.09, but it looks like you are too | 19:21:01 |