Skip to content

maintainers/scripts/haskell: don't redundantly add C++ Nix to env#421261

Merged
wolfgangwalther merged 1 commit intoNixOS:haskell-updatesfrom
sternenseemann:workaround-400784
Jun 30, 2025
Merged

maintainers/scripts/haskell: don't redundantly add C++ Nix to env#421261
wolfgangwalther merged 1 commit intoNixOS:haskell-updatesfrom
sternenseemann:workaround-400784

Conversation

@sternenseemann
Copy link
Member

Since the shebang calls nix-shell, we can safely assume that Nix (Lix, C++ Nix) is installed. Our scripts should support a wide enough range of Nix versions so that using the “impure” version of the tool is not a problem.

This works around #400784. My theory is that the Nix frontend commands no longer work with older versions of the Nix daemon nor the Lix daemon in our workloads.

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/)
  • Nixpkgs 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Nixpkgs Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • NixOS 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 NixOS Release notes)
    • (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, pkgs/README.md, maintainers/README.md and other contributing documentation in corresponding paths.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

Since the shebang calls nix-shell, we can safely assume that Nix (Lix,
C++ Nix) is installed. Our scripts should support a wide enough range of
Nix versions so that using the “impure” version of the tool is not a
problem.

This works around NixOS#400784. My theory is that the Nix frontend commands
no longer work with older versions of the Nix daemon nor the Lix daemon
in our workloads.
@nix-owners nix-owners bot requested review from maralorn and wolfgangwalther June 30, 2025 14:21
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux. 6.topic: haskell General-purpose, statically typed, purely functional programming language labels Jun 30, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Absolutely!

(also, this way, we respect the user's choice of which nix to use a bit more)

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added the 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. label Jun 30, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther merged commit 91e3af2 into NixOS:haskell-updates Jun 30, 2025
29 of 31 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

6.topic: haskell General-purpose, statically typed, purely functional programming language 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux. 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants