Nix Hackers | 902 Members | |
| For people hacking on the Nix package manager itself | 191 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 3 Nov 2021 | ||
In reply to @tomberek:matrix.orgAre there actual uses of the bundle API? I tried looking for some but only found nix-bundle | 12:43:24 | |
| Ambroisie: I'd like there to be more. (https://github.com/juliosueiras-nix/nix-utils )and i'm putting together a few things ( https://github.com/tomberek/nix-generators ) and noticed this API need. And i'm playing with this PR https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/5456 . thought's+opinions+feedback welcome | 12:45:47 | |
| I'm thinking of a parallel of nixos-generators, but for any nix closure. | 12:46:42 | |
| Are there any thoughts on removing I also imagine that one could add something like | 16:11:33 | |
Mhm, shouldn't builtins.tryEval (toString {}) return an attrset with the success attribute? Instead it is just barfing at me that it can't convert a set to a string :( | 16:13:57 | |
It does work with the __toString attribute of a set: builtins.tryEval (toString { __toString = builtins.throw "bar"; }) | 16:17:22 | |
In reply to @andi:kack.it https://nixos.org/manual/nix/unstable/expressions/builtins.html#built-in-functions "tryEval will only prevent errors created by throw or assert from being thrown. Errors tryEval will not catch are for example those created by abort and type errors generated by builtins." | 16:18:39 | |
alright, time to duplicate the toString logic then :( | 16:19:42 | |
oh | 18:49:01 | |
| "SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: 6032 byte(s) leaked in 141 allocation(s)." - it's going down down down (just using GC for everything though) | 23:14:45 | |
| 4 Nov 2021 | ||
| Is there an open issue in Nix that might make a good candidate for a compiler class project? | 02:45:28 | |
| Aligning course-work with open-source contributions would sure be swell | 02:45:48 | |
| Run ThreadSanitizer on the Nix codebase ? | 02:48:39 | |
| fzakaria: hard to find something in Nix itself. But i'm sure hnix or rnix (haskell or rust projects) to do Nix eval. Or go help with Nickel? | 02:48:40 | |
| Perhaps do more fuzzing? | 02:52:54 | |
In reply to @tomberek:matrix.orgI think pamplemousse has an ongoing project here, or maybe it's complete already | 02:53:48 | |
| I think the fellowship is over, stopped hearing updates. But yes, that's where I'd start. | 02:54:41 | |
| * fzakaria: hard to find something in Nix itself. But i'm sure hnix or rnix (haskell or rust projects) would want to do more/better Nix eval. Or go help with Nickel? | 02:55:23 | |
| Couldn't find the repository they contributed too. | 02:58:03 | |
| I do see the discourse posts though | 02:58:07 | |
| tomberek: aside: my ears perked up when you mentioned an updated installer matrix in the rfc106 thread, in part because I've been trying to drum up interest in more of an installer test suite--something that actually confirms Nix installs with different flags/platforms/shells/rcfiles/etc | 03:01:05 | |
| * tomberek: aside: my ears perked up when you mentioned an updated installer matrix in the rfc106 thread, in part because I've been trying to drum up interest in more of an installer test suite--something that actually confirms Nix installs with different flags/platforms/shells/rcfiles/etc (https://discourse.nixos.org/t/installer-test-suite-small-project-s-high-leverage-help-wanted/13662) | 03:01:21 | |
| hrm... interesting | 03:02:51 | |
| I like Graham's approach, it's on VM's so a bit more faithful than relying on Actions. | 03:07:33 | |
| I'm not sure what the "right" form is | 03:15:36 | |
| being able to run them on PRs is great for being able to improve the installer with confidence, but obviously not releasing busted installers is the more important virtue | 03:17:17 | |
for example, the 2.4 single-user installers weren't working on ubuntu because of a change that used echo -e, which isn't compatible with dash, which I guess Ubuntu uses as /bin/sh; actions does test ubuntu, just not the single-user... | 03:22:13 | |
| let's do it, pair up sometime? | 03:23:45 | |
| abathur shellcheck could catch that specific issue | 03:35:37 | |
| it would, but without a test suite someone naively shellchecking the whole installer won't know if they're breaking things that depend on behavior shellcheck warns against | 03:37:03 | |