Skip to content

systemd: 239.20190219 -> 241.20190221#56184

Closed
Mic92 wants to merge 2 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom
Mic92:systemd-241
Closed

systemd: 239.20190219 -> 241.20190221#56184
Mic92 wants to merge 2 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom
Mic92:systemd-241

Conversation

@Mic92
Copy link
Member

@Mic92 Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Motivation for this change
Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@Mic92 Mic92 requested a review from fpletz February 22, 2019 08:52
Mic92
Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkgs/os-specific/linux/systemd/default.nix Outdated
Copy link
Member Author

@Mic92 Mic92 Feb 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I should have a look if splicing works as expected in the cross-compiling case. However I think it only did not work before because the python env was stringified into preConfigure.

Copy link
Member Author

@Mic92 Mic92 Feb 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok. Splicing did not work. I explicitly changed it back to buildPackages

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019

cc @lheckemann in case this is relevant for 19.03.

@fpletz
Copy link
Member

fpletz commented Feb 22, 2019

I was in the process of preparing systemd 240. 😄 I'm not sure whether we can get enough testing done for a systemd bump until 19.03. I'll test later today in any case.

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019 •
edited
Loading

I actually used your branch as a base for my rebase.
239 might be fine as well.

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 22, 2019

Do you know about any notable down-sides of leaving 19.03 on 239?

@GrahamcOfBorg GrahamcOfBorg added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches. labels Feb 22, 2019
@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019

A bit more effort when backporting fixes. Systemd usually has a systemd-stable fork, that backports stuff and we also start pulling patches from debian, which are currently on systemd v240. And maybe missing out some features. Also I have not found something in the NEWS file that would be super relevant for the next release.

@Mic92 Mic92 requested a review from infinisil as a code owner February 22, 2019 09:24
Mic92
Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019
View reviewed changes
nixos/modules/misc/version.nix
PRETTY_NAME="NixOS ${cfg.version} (${cfg.codeName})"
LOGO="nix-snowflake"
HOME_URL="https://nixos.org/"
DOCUMENTATION_URL="https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html"
Copy link
Member Author

@Mic92 Mic92 Feb 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is new in v240: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/f2ccf8320ac5d121cc8f50622ae3c9af1d0bfea2/NEWS#L369

@GrahamcOfBorg GrahamcOfBorg added 6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` labels Feb 22, 2019
@andir
Copy link
Member

andir commented Feb 22, 2019

A few months ago I attempted to rebase our v239 onto the stable branch. It turned out to be very intrusive. Back then I wrote two additional changes for our systemd for:

andir/systemd@300073d
andir/systemd@f0afc7c

Specifially the generator change was required to fix some of the expected behaviour on NixOS.

I have not checked if those are still required or should still be applied thought.

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019

@andir I suppose I can test this by running fsck.nix?

@andir
Copy link
Member

andir commented Feb 22, 2019

@Mic92 yes, the fsck test should show that error. Just verified that.

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Feb 22, 2019

I will have a look into that.

@lheckemann
Copy link
Member

lheckemann commented Feb 25, 2019

While this doesn't seem to be ready per se, I think we should backport this once done since maintaining an older version for 19.03 will not be any fun.

@lheckemann lheckemann mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2019
Closed
FRidh
FRidh reviewed Feb 27, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkgs/os-specific/linux/systemd/default.nix
glibcLocales
patchelf getent m4

(buildPackages.python3Packages.python.withPackages ( ps: with ps; [ python3Packages.lxml ]))
Copy link
Member

@FRidh FRidh Feb 27, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
(buildPackages.python3Packages.python.withPackages ( ps: with ps; [ python3Packages.lxml ]))
(buildPackages.python3Packages.python.withPackages ( ps: with ps; [ lxml ]))

Copy link
Member

@lheckemann lheckemann Mar 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Or just buildPackages.python3.withPackages (ps: [ps.lxml])?

@lheckemann
Copy link
Member

lheckemann commented Mar 7, 2019

Is there anything preventing merging this?

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented Mar 7, 2019

@lheckemann yes: #56184 (comment)

@uvNikita
Copy link
Contributor

uvNikita commented Mar 8, 2019

#48749 should be fixed in v240 according to @arianvp. Would be nice to get it backported to 19.03 :)

@arianvp
Copy link
Member

arianvp commented Mar 10, 2019

Worst case we can backport the cgroups patch on the v239 branch if this doesn't land into 19.03

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Mar 10, 2019

That seems quite a likely outcome to me, given the current state – I hear of almost no NixOS system running on the new version and we only have three weeks before release.

@qolii

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@andir andir mentioned this pull request Mar 23, 2019
Merged
10 tasks
@andir

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@qolii

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@infinisil infinisil added the 8.has: package (update) This PR updates a package to a newer version label Mar 30, 2019
@flokli flokli mentioned this pull request May 3, 2019
Closed
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 7, 2019

242 is out, it would be nice if we could get it done, I was also seeing a bug that is fixed in the current version.

@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented May 8, 2019

I think @andir has also made some progress on this.

@andir
Copy link
Member

andir commented May 8, 2019 •
edited
Loading

I did run a nixpkgs release build of v241 + the two patches that I mentioned above (a07cf20 / https://github.com/andir/nixpkgs/tree/nixos-v241).

Looking at the results of my hydra build (https://hydra.h4ck.space/jobset/nixpkgs/systemd-241-full ipv6-only, sorry) it doesn't look too bad.

The failing tests are below. I am not entirely convinced that those really fail because of systemd. That is something I want to verify in the coming days.

I did a brief rebase for v242 but so far it stops very early in some meson scripts. Probably nothing big just have to sit down and take a bit of time for that. My WIP there can be seen at https://github.com/andir/systemd/tree/nixos-v242

Failed 	157887 	tests.ceph.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-All-in-one-basic-ceph-cluster 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157979 	tests.gdk-pixbuf.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-gdk-pixbuf 	x86_64-linux
Dependency failed 	157815 	tests.minio.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-minio 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157875 	tests.neo4j.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-neo4j 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157703 	tests.ostree.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-ostree 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157956 	tests.slurm.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-slurm 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157899 	tests.flatpak.x86_64-linux 	15h ago 	vm-test-run-flatpak 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157754 	tests.gocd-agent.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-gocd-agent 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157938 	tests.kubernetes.dns.multinode.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-kubernetes-dns-multinode 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157830 	tests.kubernetes.dns.singlenode.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-kubernetes-dns-singlenode 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157740 	tests.kubernetes.rbac.multinode.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-kubernetes-rbac-multinode 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157838 	tests.kubernetes.rbac.singlenode.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-kubernetes-rbac-singlenode 	x86_64-linux
Dependency failed 	157701 	tests.mesos.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-mesos 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157688 	tests.mysqlReplication.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-mysql-replication 	x86_64-linux
Dependency failed 	157755 	tests.postgis.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-postgis 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157735 	tests.prometheus-exporters.x86_64-linux 	16h ago 	vm-test-run-prometheus-exporters 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157686 	tests.radicale.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-radicale 	x86_64-linux
Failed 	157819 	tests.taskserver.x86_64-linux 	17h ago 	vm-test-run-taskserver 	x86_64-linux

@andir andir mentioned this pull request May 11, 2019
Merged
10 tasks
@Mic92
Copy link
Member Author

Mic92 commented May 31, 2019

superseeded by #61321

@Mic92 Mic92 closed this May 31, 2019
@Mic92 Mic92 deleted the systemd-241 branch July 23, 2021 08:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@fpletz fpletz Awaiting requested review from fpletz

@edolstra edolstra Awaiting requested review from edolstra

@infinisil infinisil Awaiting requested review from infinisil

2 more reviewers

@lheckemann lheckemann lheckemann left review comments

@FRidh FRidh FRidh left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` 8.has: package (update) This PR updates a package to a newer version 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.