Skip to content

tytools: 0.9.8 -> 0.9.9#385393

Merged
GaetanLepage merged 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
scvalex:tytools-099-3
Mar 5, 2025
Merged

tytools: 0.9.8 -> 0.9.9#385393
GaetanLepage merged 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
scvalex:tytools-099-3

Conversation

@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor

@scvalex scvalex commented Feb 26, 2025

Release notes: https://github.com/Koromix/tytools/releases/tag/v0.9.9

This patch-level version bump in upstream includes:

  • change to a new [mono]repo,
  • change dep from qt5 to qt6,
  • change from cmake to a custom build system.

Tytools is a bit annoying to test because of qt. Basically, the current tytools in nixpkgs 24.11 don't work for me. Starting tyuploader works, but when I plug in a board and click the "Upload" button, the app crashes with Cannot mix incompatible Qt library (5.15.15) with this library (5.15.16).

The same thing happens to me if I try to run this patch based on master. The error is Cannot mix incompatible Qt library (6.8.1) with this library (6.8.2).

However, if I run this patch applied to 24.11, then everything works as expected and I successfully flashed a board. So, I assume it would work on nixos-unstable as well, but I don't have a system running that version to test.

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@github-actions github-actions bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Linux. 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Linux. labels Feb 26, 2025
@nix-owners nix-owners bot requested a review from alesya-h February 26, 2025 21:39
@wegank wegank added the 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. label Feb 28, 2025
Copy link
Member

@alesya-h alesya-h left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks good to me

@wegank wegank added 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages. and removed 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. labels Mar 3, 2025
@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor Author

scvalex commented Mar 5, 2025

I made the requested changes (including the contentious with lib; one).

I tested by copying the final patch onto nixos-24.11 and flashing a board with tyUploader.

While I wholly agree with the sentiments expressed in #387072, I don't really have enough of a stake in nixpkgs to have an opinion on this, so I just made the requested change here to end the discussion in this PR. I personally hope the discussion reaches a consensus on the other PR and a style guide is published.

Copy link
Contributor

@drupol drupol left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Diff LGTM ! Thanks for implementing the optional changes.

This patch-level version bump in upstream includes:
  - change to a new [mono]repo,
  - change dep from qt5 to qt6,
  - change from cmake to a custom build system.

It's quite a patch-level version bump.

Co-authored-by: Gaétan Lepage <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Pol Dellaiera <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@GaetanLepage GaetanLepage left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM thanks!

@GaetanLepage
Copy link
Contributor

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 385393


x86_64-linux

✅ 1 package built:
  • tytools

aarch64-linux

✅ 1 package built:
  • tytools

x86_64-darwin

✅ 1 package built:
  • tytools

aarch64-darwin

✅ 1 package built:
  • tytools

@GaetanLepage GaetanLepage merged commit 0ae8d33 into NixOS:master Mar 5, 2025
24 of 27 checks passed
@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor Author

scvalex commented Mar 5, 2025

Thank you, all!

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Mar 7, 2025

The source hash is not reproducible on darwin. We can see it here in CI, and now it's causing issues on Hydra even for linux builds (lottery which platform attempts to download the source first).

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Mar 7, 2025

From what I've seen in the past, usually this is caused by very funny filenames in the source.

@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor Author

scvalex commented Mar 7, 2025

What's the general solution to this? Rename the files in postUnpack?

@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor Author

scvalex commented Mar 7, 2025

@vcunat What counts as a "funny" filename? I've looked through the source and the weirdest things I see are filenames with spaces and filenames with a tilda in them. There's no non-ascii characters that I can find.

@scvalex scvalex mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2025
13 tasks
@scvalex
Copy link
Contributor Author

scvalex commented Mar 7, 2025

I've got no idea how to debug this, so here's #387881 which reverts the version bump. Let's continue any discussion on that PR.

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Mar 7, 2025

I don't know really. I've been trying to avoid darwin-specific stuff...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Linux. 10.rebuild-linux: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Linux. 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants