Skip to content

default.nix: say which old Nix version is being used#435683

Merged
lf- merged 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
lf-:jade/push-vtsklrspvywq
Aug 22, 2025
Merged

default.nix: say which old Nix version is being used#435683
lf- merged 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
lf-:jade/push-vtsklrspvywq

Conversation

@lf-
Copy link
Member

@lf- lf- commented Aug 21, 2025

We are hitting a long tail of problems at work related to old nix-direnv sneaking old nix versions in that would be fixed by nix-community/nix-direnv#513, except that the issue is that nix-direnv itself is too old.

It would at least be very helpful to print out what ancient nix version is at fault.

Tested by messing with minver and confirming it evals to something pretty.

Things done

  • Built on platform:
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Ran nixpkgs-review on this PR. See nixpkgs-review usage.
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files, usually in ./result/bin/.
  • Nixpkgs Release Notes
    • Package update: when the change is major or breaking.
  • NixOS Release Notes
    • Module addition: when adding a new NixOS module.
    • Module update: when the change is significant.
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md, pkgs/README.md, maintainers/README.md and other READMEs.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

We are hitting a long tail of problems at work related to old nix-direnv
sneaking old nix versions in that would be fixed by
nix-community/nix-direnv#513, except that the
issue is that nix-direnv itself is too old.

It would at least be very helpful to print out *what* ancient nix
version is at fault.
@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. labels Aug 21, 2025
@nix-owners nix-owners bot requested a review from Ericson2314 August 21, 2025 22:06
Copy link
Member

@RaitoBezarius RaitoBezarius left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, would hardly fail due to the fallback.

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added the 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. label Aug 21, 2025
@lf- lf- merged commit 1a10072 into NixOS:master Aug 22, 2025
27 of 30 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

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: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants