On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:09:21 +0400
Michael Raskin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >It's probably not a big deal. On the other hand consider that it only
> >happens in a rather special scenario and may go unnoticed for quite
> >some time.
> >
> >Consider an application (like a game) with a bunch of separate sets of
> >data files, each optional and referring to each other, compressed to
> >save space. This is an actual design that I'm following in one of my
> >projects. I'll know to make it Nix-friendly, but non-NixOS developers
> >may fail to do so.
>
> I think that any proposal would be seriously considered. Any already
> existing application creating such a problem would increase your chances
> to make someone else propose a solution… Otherwise — I think the problem
> can surface, but I have no idea ho to fix it sanely… I think many other
> people think the same.
Well, let's not try to decide the undecidable. Would it be so bad to
have explicit dependencies? That seems to be the only sound solution.
A straightforward way is to add a small dotfile via the builder script
with paths to the output. The only problem at this point is that there
is pretty much no support for doing that, so it's error-prone. I could
totally see something like this happening:
stdenv.mkDerivation {
...
requisites = [cacert dataFiles1 dataFiles2];
...
}
All it does is to register the given derivations as requisites
unconditionally, perhaps simply by writing the aforementioned dotfile
at $out/.nixdeps.
Greets,
Ertugrul
--
Ertugrul Söylemez <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
nix-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
