flakelight | 38 Members | |
| https://github.com/nix-community/flakelight | 12 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Mar 2024 | ||
| * I'd like to float an idea. If you just want flakelight to provide you a recent nixpkgs (the default), you dont have to do anything:
If you want to bring your own nixpkgs, you have to pass it to flakelight:
But what if you didn't have to pass it and flakelight would use your input? Like this:
Currently, that is having a nixpkgs input, but having flakelight still use its With this proposal, that becomes using your nixpkgs input for flakelight as well. Upsides:
Downsides:
Passing inputs explicitly may still be preferred for performance or unusual circumstances, (The autodetection would work by reading | 04:46:49 | |
| 10 Mar 2024 | ||
| I'll also be at Nixcon NA btw | 03:54:31 | |
| yeah I like your above approval. personally, the main reason I use flakelight is because of how succinct and elegant it is. I think as long as it's well documented and passing inputs explicitly can override detected ones, it's a nice addition :) | 09:02:48 | |
| 11 Mar 2024 | ||
Added the change; should now only need to set inputs if using self or want to override | 02:49:04 | |
* Added the change; should now only need to set inputs if using inputs.self or want to override | 02:49:30 | |
| 13 Mar 2024 | ||
just wondering, regarding devShells in flakelight, is there a means to use something like devenv ? it has it's own devenv.lib.mkShell which I'd love to be able to use with flakelight | 13:49:14 | |
| Yeah, you can just set any of the devshells to the output of that function | 14:58:08 | |
| Something like:
| 15:08:40 | |
| * Something like:
| 15:10:18 | |
| there we go, not used to enter in middle of message submitting ha | 15:10:43 | |
| * Something like:
| 15:16:35 | |
| * Something like:
| 15:17:10 | |
| I think that should work? Though it seems devenv requires impure? | 15:17:32 | |
awesome, how about if I wanted to use the autoload for devShells/ ? | 16:01:36 | |
| yeah, sadly devenv needs impurity because of some of the features around process management 😢 (I think it writes to files) | 16:02:11 | |
| for autoloading could have:
and put that in | 16:17:03 | |
| oh great, okay that's perfect - thanks! | 16:17:34 | |
| any idea why a package definition in
haven't run into this with other packages I've defined wherein I use a bunch of build inputs from nixpkgs. | 16:48:29 | |
| Huh it does not seem to exist in nixpkgs anymore. Maybe it was moved? | 16:58:42 | |
Download image.png | 16:59:30 | |
| no problem about questions, ask away | 16:59:56 | |
that is very confusing 😅 I was using example = callPackage ./packages/example { inherit buildPythonPackage; }; in a previous iteration of this project and it worked | 17:01:24 | |
| it seems packages in nixpkgs are also using it which is wierd | 17:01:47 | |
| * it seems packages in nixpkgs are also using it which is weird | 17:01:51 | |
| Ah | 17:02:05 | |
| its under pythonPackages, is that perhaps why? | 17:02:44 | |
the inherit buildPythonPackage; there adds/overrides stuff to the package set for that callPackage | 17:02:48 | |
if its pythonPackages.buildPythonPackage you'll want your to take { pythonPackages } and go from there | 17:03:51 | |
| oh good, I'm glad you suggested that, haha. I thought "maybe I just use that, but then I don't want it to all be in scope", but I guess it doesn't matter anyway because of lazy eval? | 17:04:46 | |
| Yeah, lazy eval takes care of it | 17:05:02 | |