!yNLbWuxtZEZoUZYwKG:nixos.org

Nix Geospatial Team

33 Members
Nix Geospatial packages maintenance. Team board - https://github.com/orgs/NixOS/projects/47/views/18 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
27 Sep 2024
@autra:trancart.euautra ok so everyone seems to have fixed that by using (libxml2.override { enableHttp = true; }). But gmt does not depend directly from it. It depends from libxml2 through libspatialite (the fix is already applied) and through netcdf. 19:39:51
@autra:trancart.euautraIf I patch netcdf, it works, but is it ok?19:40:04
@autra:trancart.euautra

I also did:

    (netcdf.override { libxml2 = (libxml2.override { enableHttp = true; }); })

In gmt's build input, but that does not work

19:40:42
@autra:trancart.euautraAh I need to do that in all-packages, it's probaly too late in buildInputs. 19:49:10
@autra:trancart.euautraAll right, sorry for the noise, PR time :-)19:49:17
30 Sep 2024
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik) autra: thanks for your investigation. Reading your messages now. 07:30:22
1 Oct 2024
@-_o:matrix.org-_o joined the room.20:59:47
2 Oct 2024
@raul.nanclares:matrix.orgRaul Nanclares joined the room.14:38:30
3 Oct 2024
@autra:trancart.euautraHi! do we have blockers for 24.11? (I didn't see any but...)07:43:27
@autra:trancart.euautramaybe we want to ship postgis 3.5 before the "no breaking change" 07:43:54
@autra:trancart.euautrawindow though07:43:56
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
Hi! do we have blockers for 24.11? (I didn't see any but...)
I just wanted to report that we don't have any blockers, but I agree that we should try to get postgis 3.5 to 24.11.
11:45:08
@autra:trancart.euautraok pushing my wip now :-)11:59:37
@autra:trancart.euautraAs soon as we think we are ready, we should check the box here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/34492013:15:39
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
As soon as we think we are ready, we should check the box here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/344920
Yes.
14:48:30
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
ok pushing my wip now :-)
PR looks good. Can I merge now ?
14:50:44
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
ok pushing my wip now :-)
* autra: PR looks good. Can I merge now ?
14:50:55
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)I think, we should also try to merge https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/342101 and https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/344664 14:57:21
@autra:trancart.euautra
In reply to @imincik:matrix.org
autra: PR looks good. Can I merge now ?
I wanted to take the opportunity to add two little tests in nixos/tests
15:35:18
4 Oct 2024
@autra:trancart.euautra Ivan Mincik (imincik): btw, about the "QGIS: don't build with GRASS by default" issue in the board, what's the rational? (I use it from time to time and I'll be moderately in favor of keeping it by default for the discoverability in the processing pane) 06:58:23
@autra:trancart.euautrathat being said, a withGrass makes sense.07:35:47
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
Ivan Mincik (imincik): btw, about the "QGIS: don't build with GRASS by default" issue in the board, what's the rational? (I use it from time to time and I'll be moderately in favor of keeping it by default for the discoverability in the processing pane)
To make a QGIS closure small by default
08:28:03
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
that being said, a withGrass makes sense.
Yes, but we really need to come with a better way of unwrapped package overriding .
08:28:53
@autra:trancart.euautra
In reply to @imincik:matrix.org
Yes, but we really need to come with a better way of unwrapped package overriding .
at the same time, I'd say we can start simple and see after. If we have only 5-10 parameters, just propagating them to the callPackage ./unwrapped {} thing is really ok imo.
09:21:56
@autra:trancart.euautraor maybe I'm missing your point though.09:22:16
@autra:trancart.euautraI'm not against a bit of boilerplate if it makes things simpler to write and easier to read.09:22:34
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
at the same time, I'd say we can start simple and see after. If we have only 5-10 parameters, just propagating them to the callPackage ./unwrapped {} thing is really ok imo.
The problem is unwrapped package being called via let binding which makes very hard to use parameters from unwrapped package. We need to come with something better to make it more user friendly.
09:25:19
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)Do you have some ideas ? 09:25:28
@autra:trancart.euautrawe can just propagate it like that: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/master...autra:nixpkgs:qgis_unwrapped_param That'll work, right?09:28:56
@imincik:matrix.orgIvan Mincik (imincik)
In reply to @autra:trancart.eu
we can just propagate it like that: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/master...autra:nixpkgs:qgis_unwrapped_param

That'll work, right?
Yes, this works and I am not personally against this approach.
09:30:24

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10