-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
emacsPackages.cask: use melpaBuild #338010
Conversation
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Show resolved
Hide resolved
5c8fba2
to
5b752d2
Compare
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
e50412e
to
5850c03
Compare
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/0000-cask-clidir.diff
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pname = "cask-source"; | ||
inherit version; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not sure about this change. This is similar to NixOS/rfcs#171, right? I do not follow that RFC, but since it is closed, I guess we should not set pname
and version
here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I use this to track the various fetchers.
The experience of various hash mismatch in /nix/store/<hash>-source.drv
is confusing and horrible.
TBH I have never read this RFC.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So it is only used for development? What about not including it in the final expression?
BTW, there is only one hash for this package. It would not be confusing if you build this package alone for development, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As a package developer, sometimes I test various more or less unrelated things at the same time.
It is easier than creating a lot of dedicated branches and swapping among them.
Further, nixpkgs-review
makes it easier to test various modifications at the same time.
(Obviously, since GitHub forces a merge-branch style of development, I split the modifications into dedicated branches before uploading them.)
Supposing nothing else goes wrong and I am dealing with only one fetcher, naming the fetcher is redundant indeed.
On the other hand, as a regular user I have bumped around hash mismatches when nixos-rebuild
ing my local machine.
Not a serious problem, for sure - I just waited one day to try again.
Nonetheless the message is cryptic. By adding name
it becomes a bit less cryptic.
Since it is common practice to add workarounds for many things too hard to fix in Nixpkgs, I feel justified in using this.
It is way easier to understand and accept when compared to (say) wafHook = waf.hook;
...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would say what you want is basically NixOS/rfcs#171. Pros and cons are discussed there. There must be a reason to not accept that RFC, right? In addition, I do not find any precedents in the repo in a quick search. So I slightly against this.
Not a blocker.
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
fe75458
to
235bbf4
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
diff looks good now. I'll undraft it.
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Show resolved
Hide resolved
e2bd4ee
to
ffad363
Compare
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
python3 | ||
] | ||
++ (with emacs.pkgs; [ | ||
packageRequires = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Where do you find these dependencies? Maybe an update is needed.
It seems these listed packages are not referenced anywhere in the cask source code:
- dash
- ecukes
- el-mock
- ert-async
- ert-runner
- noflet
- servant
- shell-split-string
While, these referenced packages are not listed here:
- commander
- epl
- shut-up
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Afaicr I take them from (older?) Cask file: https://github.com/cask/cask/blob/master/Cask
pkgs/applications/editors/emacs/elisp-packages/manual-packages/cask/package.nix
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
- use a patch that parameterizes lispdir - so that we can get rid of SRCDIR and other dependencies - finalAttrs - remove failing doCheck - sei ignoreCompilationError to false - meta.mainProgram - meta.homepage points to GitHub - because the previous is outdated - nixfmt-rfc-style
ffad363
to
99b7472
Compare
99b7472
to
eb93347
Compare
Description of changes
Things done
nix.conf
? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxed
sandbox = true
nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD"
. Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/
)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.