| 24 May 2024 |
 7c6f434c | Distinguishing the cases is some non-trivial work, not just switching a single constant | 06:15:26 |
 trofi | Sure, but it's so sad to see thing like:
$ nix build --no-link -f. nixVersions.git.tests
...
error: attribute 'nix_2_23' missing
Did you mean one of nix_2_13, nix_2_20, nix_2_21, nix_2_22 or nix_2_3?
| 06:15:26 |
| trofi | At least "no tests specified" feels like a simple case of changing the evaluator to discover tests with $foo.tests or [] instead of $foo.tests. | 06:16:34 |
| 7c6f434c | I think right evaluation failures are handled the same for tests and for packages | 06:17:12 |
 Lily Foster | there was a check-meta check to make sure tests was an attrset of derivations | 11:13:50 |
| Lily Foster | but | 11:13:52 |
| Lily Foster | when tests were moved from meta.tests to passthru.tests before that PR was merged | 11:14:14 |
| Lily Foster | the check-meta check was not updated | 11:14:20 |
| Lily Foster | so it's not useful right now | 11:14:27 |
| Lily Foster | but checking it there-ish would be ideal | 11:14:49 |
| Lily Foster | (and then abort-ish eval failures (e.g. syntax errors) vs throw-ish eval failures would also be differentiated, as intended by most eval checks) | 11:15:52 |
| Lily Foster | * (and then abort-ish eval failures (e.g. syntax errors) vs throw-ish eval failures (e.g. not available on platform) would also be differentiated, as intended by most eval checks) | 11:16:18 |
| 27 May 2024 |
 vcunat | Any idea if the eval label mechanism is broken? It got completely wrong in this case: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/314255#issuecomment-2132781439 | 07:06:12 |
| vcunat | (also in the original PR from which this backport was created) | 07:07:28 |
| vcunat | Or do the linux rebuild labels not take aarch64-linux into account? | 07:07:58 |
