Re: [Nix-dev] Simplify node packages?
> > I have read the articles from Sander van der Burg, but they don't seem to > explain why we went with "one derivation per library", which requires us to > manually symlink things into the node_modules folder. > I'm not sure if you have read my blog articles correctly, but what node2nix currently does is one derivation per application and statically bundles all NPM dependencies with it. The old approach that npm2nix used to implement was a derivation per dependency and symlinking between them. As explained in this blog post: http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html this works for many packages, but does not reliably work in all cases. Moreover, it does not work with packages having cyclic dependencies. * A simple approach to packaging NPM applications would be to split the > package for an NPM application into two: > - fetch: let NPM download all the dependencies. it should(?) be possible > to make this a fixed-output derivation, as long as NPM downloads the same > set of dependencies each time > - build: use the cache from the fetch phase, should require no network > access > This might be an alternative approach worth investigating. However, dealing with NPM's conflicting dependency management is not that simple -- for example, there are version specifiers always triggering network communication (such as version specifiers referring to tags or HTTP URLs), regardless whether a version has already been provided or not. Furthermore, there are dependencies that bundle C code with them requiring them to be source compiled e.g. with gcc. Running NPM outside a Nix builder environment first and "importing" them into Nix through a fixed-output derivation does not reliably work with such packages. Well, perhaps that's the algorithm it uses right now, but I feel that we >> depend very much on implementation details of npm here, which IMO is not a >> good solution. >> If we get upstream to support enough for our use case, the solution >> should be much more stable. >> > It would obviously be great if we could convince the NPM developers to change/reconsider some of their "design choices", but I think this will be quite difficult. One of the reasons I have given a talk at FOSDEM 2017 about this subject is to explain some of the undesired implications of NPM in the hope that somebody would look at it. However, as with many open source projects, it is difficult to change someone's mind/opinion. Moreover, even if there are people willing to change, there is still the argument that legacy applications need to be supported. I think this is the best way forward. Yarn is *much* better than npm and is > being enthusiastically adopted by the node community. Whatever > compatibility issues that currently exist with yarn will soon be resolved. > (Nix users have basically no influence, but package maintainers can't > afford to ignore yarn users.) > Now yarn (and other approaches such as ied) do obviously a much better job than NPM in some aspects. Unfortunately, as of today, NPM remains the de-facto standard for Node.js package deployment, and I'm not sure if this will ever change. The purpose of node2nix is not to be "the better NPM" -- it's only objective is to integrate NPM packages and development projects into the Nix ecosystem with minimal disruptions. Ideally, whenever an NPM project works, node2nix should work as well. (Obviously: this experience is not always perfect, but we try as hard as we can). Finally, I'd like to note that the some of the concepts that NPM (and in some extent yarn) implement are fundamentally different and somewhat conflicting with how Nix does things. For example, what we ideally like to see is that dependencies can be shared. For example, when a project depends on lodash-4.17.4 we ideally only want one copy of it in the store that all dependent projects can use. Unfortunately, the way NPM composes packages is context-dependent (e.g. in some scenario's lodash's dependencies resolve to other versions depending on which common dependencies are already used in the project). As a result, sharing NPM package dependencies among projects/application will not work. Because this is an NPM/CommonJS limitation, it is a limitation in Nix as well. The latter aspect can only be solved if NPM makes their dependency addressing and composition facilities better. On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Profpatsch wrote: > On 17-04-25 08:20am, Benno Fünfstück wrote: > > If we get upstream to support enough for our use case, the solution > should > > be much more stable. > > Upstream support might be helpful, > but that’s a wholly different beast. > > > Hmm, so perhaps in we can unpack the tarballs already in `phase 1` and > tell > >
Re: [Nix-dev] Failure to boot after hibernate
Bas van Dijk wrote (ao): > On 24 April 2017 at 12:35, Linus Heckemann wrote: > > If it's systemd-boot, which it probably is, it does in fact allow > > editing unless you disable it in its config — I think you just press E > > to edit the command line. > > I actually disabled that (I believe for security reasons) using: > > boot.loader.systemd-boot.editor = false; https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd-boot#Kernel_parameters_editor_with_password_protection "With enabled editor you will be prompted for your password before you can edit kernel parameters." Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl https://mailman.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Editor for the configuration file
Andreas Meyer wrote (ao):
> One more question for now. To bring up WLAN do I have to enable
> wpa_supplicant and networkmanager in the configuration.nix ?
Not AFAICT, just:
networking.wireless.networks = {
"Fast Lane Guest" = {
psk = "";
};
"CWLANGuest" = {
psk = "";
};
"KPN" = {
};
};
Sander
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 8b403e: Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 8b403e5e316eb403987f6a6fed90aaf541e28a9d https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/8b403e5e316eb403987f6a6fed90aaf541e28a9d Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-31 (Fri, 31 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v6.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v6.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/composition.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/node-packages.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 699a57: Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0
Branch: refs/heads/release-17.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 699a57d97dc247c97e33be915c7eb0dcf4ff7e30 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/699a57d97dc247c97e33be915c7eb0dcf4ff7e30 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-31 (Fri, 31 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v6.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/generate.sh M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v6.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/composition.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/node-packages.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 7408ac: Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 7408aca5284cb3bc86bdb8e08990fe604f6b8d9c https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/7408aca5284cb3bc86bdb8e08990fe604f6b8d9c Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-31 (Fri, 31 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v6.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/generate.sh M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v6.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/composition.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/node-packages.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- Regenerate NPM expressions with node2nix 1.2.0 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 3a3b7c: dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 3a3b7c9539e60adb67871e1a97659808b245ae23 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/3a3b7c9539e60adb67871e1a97659808b245ae23 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-20 (Mon, 20 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/networking/dd-agent/default.nix Log Message: --- dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB monitoring ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 718576: dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB...
Branch: refs/heads/release-17.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 7185762996e27e5e5dbe8460798ef554de549f83 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/7185762996e27e5e5dbe8460798ef554de549f83 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-20 (Mon, 20 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/networking/dd-agent/default.nix Log Message: --- dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB monitoring (cherry picked from commit 20194e2696a276937bfe7b448951036831c69700) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 20194e: dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 20194e2696a276937bfe7b448951036831c69700 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/20194e2696a276937bfe7b448951036831c69700 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-20 (Mon, 20 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/networking/dd-agent/default.nix Log Message: --- dd-agent: bind to pymongo 2.9.1 to fix the MongoDB monitoring ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] nixos-rebuild switch error
Linus Heckemann wrote (ao): > these are the key lines; particularly > > curl: (6) Couldn't resolve host 'cache.nixos.org <http://cache.nixos.org>' > This failure is caused by a flaky internet connection, so it makes sense > that trying again would fix it. Nothing to be concerned about, besides > perhaps the poor UX, making it very unclear what the actual cause of the > failure is :) nix 1.12 contains fixes for that. Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] f9a23e: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: f9a23edb16012d67478c112207857b624d2ec113 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/f9a23edb16012d67478c112207857b624d2ec113 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-14 (Tue, 14 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/DisnixWebService/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/disnixos/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7 (cherry picked from commit a26c51116d681a2828ad836386b7698dc3876689) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] d9c1a7: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7
Branch: refs/heads/release-17.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: d9c1a77b89dc6ed98e2da208e6ad78bc04938668 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/d9c1a77b89dc6ed98e2da208e6ad78bc04938668 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-14 (Tue, 14 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/DisnixWebService/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/disnixos/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7 (cherry picked from commit a26c51116d681a2828ad836386b7698dc3876689) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] a26c51: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: a26c51116d681a2828ad836386b7698dc3876689 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/a26c51116d681a2828ad836386b7698dc3876689 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-03-14 (Tue, 14 Mar 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/DisnixWebService/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/disnixos/default.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.7 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
zimbatm wrote (ao): > At the moment we don't provide a strong guarantee that release > upgrades will be 100% backward-compatible. Having a "stable" channel > that jumps between releases would be misleading I think. With Debian one can choose a specific [1]release (Wheezy, Jessie, Stretch, Sid (roling release)), or old-stable (Wheezy), stable (Jessie, will become old-stable)), testing (Stretch, will become stable), experimental and unstable (Sid, always unstable). old-stable, stable, etc, are just symlinks. Linux all about choice. And Debian does not guarantee anything either. You get to keep the pieces though. I would like to pin my server to 'nixos-stable', just as my laptop is on 'nixos-unstable' (mostly because of wayland). Sander 1. ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/dists/ ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
Kevin Cox wrote (ao): > On Mar 5, 2017 19:26, "Bjørn Forsman" wrote: > > As long as the nixos-stable channel is an opt-in, why not? > > Well there would be a maintenance overhead. Moving a symlink twice a year? Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
Graham Christensen wrote (ao): > NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS > being developed: > > - 16.09 (stable) > - 17.03 (beta) > - unstable Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to whatever channel is stable? Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Configure Nix to compile in RAMFS?
Marc Weber wrote (ao):
> > is it possible to set Nix to compile in a RAMFS? If yes, how to do this?
> fileSystems = [ { device = "tmpfs"; mountPoint="/tmp"; fsType =
> "tmpfs"; options = ["size=2m" "mode=1777"]; }]
> (adopt to your liking)
or
boot.tmpOnTmpfs = true;
in configuration.nix ?
Sander
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Fosdem
I'll be there (as may probably already know ;) ) On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Maarten Hoogendoorn wrote: > Me too! > > I could not quickly find a dev-room for Nix, did I miss something? > I did notice that Sander van der Burg is going to talk about node2nix > > Are there plans in place to have a meeting? > > 2017-02-01 13:38 GMT+01:00 Adrien Devresse : > >> I will also be there >> >> Adrien >> >> Le 01. 02. 17 à 10:27, José San Leandro a écrit : >> >> Me too (+1) >> >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Théophane Hufschmitt < >> rg_ni...@regnat.ovh> wrote: >> >>> I'll be there too ! >>> With another nixer friend >>> >>> Quoting zimbatm (2017-01-31 09:16:22) >>> > Count me in! >>> > >>> > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017, 21:56 Putten, A. van (Arian), >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > I will be there! >>> > > -- >>> > > *From:* nix-dev-boun...@lists.science.uu.nl [ >>> > > nix-dev-boun...@lists.science.uu.nl] on behalf of Nathan Bijnens [ >>> > > nat...@nathan.gs] >>> > > *Sent:* Monday, January 30, 2017 9:35 PM >>> > > *To:* Louis Taylor >>> > > *Cc:* nix-dev >>> > > *Subject:* Re: [Nix-dev] Fosdem >>> > > >>> > > I will be there on Saturday, mostly at the Big Data track. >>> > > >>> > > N. >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 21:33 Louis Taylor wrote: >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Nathan Bijnens >>> wrote: >>> > > > Anyone going to Fosdem? >>> > > >>> > > February just isn't right without a trip to Brussels! >>> > > >>> > > ___ >>> > > nix-dev mailing list >>> > > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl >>> > > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > ___ >>> > nix-dev mailing list >>> > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl >>> > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >>> >>> ___ >>> nix-dev mailing list >>> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl >>> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >>> >>> >> >> >> ___ >> nix-dev mailing >> listnix-...@lists.science.uu.nlhttp://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >> >> >> >> ___ >> nix-dev mailing list >> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl >> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >> >> > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 3e0ad8: xcodeenv, titaniumenv: fix IPA builds by granting ...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 3e0ad8337767f381ab10dda0d1782eb7efaddb12 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/3e0ad8337767f381ab10dda0d1782eb7efaddb12 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-27 (Fri, 27 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/build-app.nix Log Message: --- xcodeenv, titaniumenv: fix IPA builds by granting codesign the right permissions (cherry picked from commit b81001188c10b0d68f3079272b8954493dd1b993) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] b81001: xcodeenv, titaniumenv: fix IPA builds by granting ...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: b81001188c10b0d68f3079272b8954493dd1b993 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/b81001188c10b0d68f3079272b8954493dd1b993 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-27 (Fri, 27 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/build-app.nix Log Message: --- xcodeenv, titaniumenv: fix IPA builds by granting codesign the right permissions ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 13c473: nodejs: 4.6.0 -> 4.6.2 and fix build on darwin
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 13c473cbfc0a39b08d2f5ab5ff20c96df15f8bcd https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/13c473cbfc0a39b08d2f5ab5ff20c96df15f8bcd Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-26 (Thu, 26 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/nodejs/v4.nix Log Message: --- nodejs: 4.6.0 -> 4.6.2 and fix build on darwin ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 5839ba: xcodeenv: make it work with Xcode 8.2.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 5839baad31555491675e1fbeb5904f3c489b7cbd https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/5839baad31555491675e1fbeb5904f3c489b7cbd Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-25 (Wed, 25 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/simulate-kitchensink/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/simulate-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/xcodewrapper.nix Log Message: --- xcodeenv: make it work with Xcode 8.2.1 (cherry picked from commit 0f6eab52e133f2e54723aed7d946efb6f25ca3ea) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 0f6eab: xcodeenv: make it work with Xcode 8.2.1
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 0f6eab52e133f2e54723aed7d946efb6f25ca3ea https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/0f6eab52e133f2e54723aed7d946efb6f25ca3ea Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-25 (Wed, 25 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/simulate-kitchensink/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/simulate-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/xcodeenv/xcodewrapper.nix Log Message: --- xcodeenv: make it work with Xcode 8.2.1 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 2f77be: titaniumenv: add 6.0 SDK + bump kitchensink testca...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 2f77befb162f4509e493337206c6f1929a09b0cd https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/2f77befb162f4509e493337206c6f1929a09b0cd Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-24 (Tue, 24 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/kitchensink/default.nix A pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/titaniumsdk-6.0.nix Log Message: --- titaniumenv: add 6.0 SDK + bump kitchensink testcase (cherry picked from commit de9a4f5fb4ecc1045dd15f65b0ae371ad36b8365) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] de9a4f: titaniumenv: add 6.0 SDK + bump kitchensink testca...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: de9a4f5fb4ecc1045dd15f65b0ae371ad36b8365 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/de9a4f5fb4ecc1045dd15f65b0ae371ad36b8365 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-24 (Tue, 24 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/kitchensink/default.nix A pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/titaniumsdk-6.0.nix Log Message: --- titaniumenv: add 6.0 SDK + bump kitchensink testcase ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 4f7fe2: titaniumenv: use Node.js 4.x for the CLI tools
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 4f7fe2706583e389e0431071dc416f76962ea5d5 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/4f7fe2706583e389e0431071dc416f76962ea5d5 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-24 (Tue, 24 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix Log Message: --- titaniumenv: use Node.js 4.x for the CLI tools ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] a5de88: nodePackages: upgrade node2nix to version 1.1.1, r...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: a5de88dbe7ed49f0cd12731e38e02403731b80d9 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/a5de88dbe7ed49f0cd12731e38e02403731b80d9 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-20 (Fri, 20 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix R pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v5.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v6.nix R pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v0_10.nix R pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v6.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/generate.sh M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix R pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v6.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/composition.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/node-packages.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- nodePackages: upgrade node2nix to version 1.1.1, regenerate the package set and remove v5 expressions ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 5cf1a4: nodePackages: upgrade node2nix to version 1.1.1 an...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 5cf1a4d36a5162601970a18abd113d81f3df8e14 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/5cf1a4d36a5162601970a18abd113d81f3df8e14 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2017-01-20 (Fri, 20 Jan 2017) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v6.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v6.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/composition.nix M pkgs/servers/web-apps/pump.io/node-packages.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- nodePackages: upgrade node2nix to version 1.1.1 and regenerate the package set ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] List of companies using NixOS (Sander van der Burg)
I have covered some aspects of our company use cases in two of my presentations: - Deploying microservices with Disnix (includes a few slides on how our backend infrastructure is organized and deployed with Disnix): http://www.slideshare.net/sandervanderburg/deploying-microservices-with-disnix - Building mobile apps with Nix: http://www.slideshare.net/sandervanderburg/building-mobile-apps-with-the-nix-package-manager On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Thomas Bereknyei wrote: > I'm investigating using NixOS/NixOps/Disnix for quick prototypes as part > of Department of Defense. (www.dds.mil) I'd like to learn more about > others using Disnix/Hydra. > > -Tom > > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 16:28:45 +0100 > From: Sander van der Burg > To: Vladim?r ?un?t > Cc: nix-dev > Subject: Re: [Nix-dev] List of companies using NixOS > Message-ID: > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > At conference compass (http://conference-compass.com), we're using Hydra > (e.g. for mobile app builds and internal projects) as well as NixOps + > Disnix for backend deployment. > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Vladim?r ?un?t wrote: > > > There were some companies presenting at NixCon - from the top of my > > head: Intel, some hedge fund (@copumpkin) and surely some I don't > > recall ATM. > > > > --Vladimir > > ___ > > nix-dev mailing list > > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] List of companies using NixOS
At conference compass (http://conference-compass.com), we're using Hydra (e.g. for mobile app builds and internal projects) as well as NixOps + Disnix for backend deployment. On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Vladimír Čunát wrote: > There were some companies presenting at NixCon - from the top of my > head: Intel, some hedge fund (@copumpkin) and surely some I don't > recall ATM. > > --Vladimir > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] FOSDEM 2017 - Distributions Devroom Call for Participation (new deadline)
I already submitted a node2nix talk proposal. Let's see if they will accept it... On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Peter Simons wrote: > I'm forwarding this message from Brian Exelbierd FYI. Maybe someone > would like to take a shot at this and submit a Nix-related talk? > > Generally speaking, who's coming to FOSDEM 2017? > > Best regards, > Peter > > > -8<- > > The Distributions devroom will take place 4 February, 2017 at FOSDEM, in > room K.4.601 at Université Libre de Bruxelles, in Brussels, Belgium. > > Distributions are more than just hosted collections of software from > various upstreams. Each distribution is responsible for problem-solving > in building, testing, and releasing software as well as managing the > lifecycle of each application in the collection. Additionally, > distributions do very important work in ensuring that various versions > of upstream software work well together and can co-exist. Distribution > are also, often responsible, for "de-vendoring" upstream software so > that security fixes can be applied more quickly. > > We welcome submissions targeted at contributors interested in issues > unique to distributions, especially in the following topics: > > - Managing Build/Test/Release processes around shared ideas and > resources > > - Lifecycle management, especially in the areas of sandboxing, > containerization, vendoring, and bundling > > - Distribution construction tools and infrastructure development and > implementation (building, signing, testing, distribution, etc.) > > - Cross-distribution collaboration on common issues, eg: content > distribution, infrastructure, and documentation > > - Working with vendors and including them in the community > > - Building trust and code relationships with the upstream components of > a distribution and between distributions > > - The future of distributions, emerging trends and evolving user > demands from the idea of a platform > > - The place of distributions in today's world (including concepts of > containerization, IoT, etc.) > > - Onboarding new users and mentorship, facilitating technical growth > within the contributor base > > - Solving traditional problems like package management, and content > management (eg. rpm/dpkg/ostree/coreos ) > > - Integration technologies like installers, deployment facilitation > (eg. cloud contextualisation ) > > - Principals of Rolling Releases, Long Term Supported Releases (LTS), > Feature gated releases, and calendar releases > > Ideal submissions are actionable and opinionated. Submissions may be in > the form of 25 or 50 minute talks, panel sessions, round-table > discussions, or Birds of a Feather (BoF) sessions. > > Due to popular demand, We are extending the CFP for the Distributions > Devroom until Friday 02-December-2016. We plan to maintain the rest of > the schedule (e.g. notification dates) as-is. We look forward to your > submissions. > > Revised Dates > -- > Submission Deadline: 02-Dec-2016 > Acceptance Notification: 5-Dec-2016 > Final Schedule Posted: 11-Dec-2016 > > How to submit > -- > Visit https://penta.fosdem.org/submission/FOSDEM17 > > 1.) If you do not have an account, create one here > 2.) Click 'Create Event' > 3.) Enter your presentation details > 4.) Be sure to select the Distributions Devroom track! > 5.) Submit > > What to include > --- > - The title of your submission > - A 1-paragraph Abstract > - A longer description including the benefit of your talk to your target > audience, including a definition of your target audience. > - Approximate length / type of submission (talk, BoF, ...) > - Links to related websites/blogs/talk material (if any) > > Administrative Notes > > We will be live-streaming and recording the Distributions Devroom. > Presenting at FOSDEM implies permission to record your session and > distribute the recording afterwards. All videos will be made available > under the standard FOSDEM content license (CC-BY). > > If you have any questions, feel free to contact the devroom organizers: > distributions-devr...@lists.fosdem.org > (https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/distributions-devroom) > > Cheers! > > Brian Exelbierd (twitter: @bexelbie) and Brian Stinson (twitter: > @bstinsonmhk) for and on behalf of The Distributions Devroom Program > Committee > -8<- > > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Nix Infographics?
I once created such a picture for my PhD dissertation (augmented with some of my own tools) a couple of years ago, but it's somewhat outdated. For example, at that time NixOps was still known as Charon. A brief summary can be found here: http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-reference-architecture-for.html On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Matan Shenhav wrote: > Dear Nixperts, > > As a novice I have a hard time visualizing the relationships between > various aspects of the Nix ecosystem. *Are there any existing graphical > overviews of the Nix ecosystem? * > > If not, I volunteer to produce a series of diagrams and infographics > publishable in the documentation (I have a background in graphic design). > > To do so I need a little help from you guys: > >1. Sketch diagram proposals by pen, photograph/scan them, and send >them back on this thread for comments. >2. I will combine these into a series of diagrams that can be embedded >in the documentation, also submitting them here for comments. >3. Finally, I will combine the whole series into a single infographic >overview of the Nix ecosystem. > > These are my naive ideas about what could be helpful diagrams, feel free > to propose an alternative scheme: > >1. Anatomy of Nix Expressions. >2. The relationships between basic components such packages, channels, >and environments. >3. The relationships between Nix, NixOS, Nixpkgs and NixOps. >4. Overview of the community development lifecycle, and relationship >between the various official channels/repos. >5. Examples of operational workflows, configuration/package >structures, etc. > > > Cheers, > Matan > > > * * * * * > > Matan Bendix Shenhav > > *Chief Science Officer*Fluxcraft > +358 (0)45 6 135 315 > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] svanderburg/disnix migrate to nixos/disnix
Dunno, I'm actually the only person developing it and it's most prominent user :) Moreover, to be able to use Disnix, it's more than just the disnix package. For example, you also need to use dysnomia. Also, I created a many example packages, that you will find on my github page. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:16 PM, stewart mackenzie wrote: > Hi Sander + all, > > Disnix looks like a very interesting piece of software, would it be a > good idea to move disnix to the main nixos/ organization? > > kr/sjm > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 30159e: lhasa: init at 0.3.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 30159e9c330fed74c70770c57d4d859bdb44a847 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/30159e9c330fed74c70770c57d4d859bdb44a847 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-10-10 (Mon, 10 Oct 2016) Changed paths: A pkgs/tools/compression/lhasa/default.nix M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- lhasa: init at 0.3.1 (cherry picked from commit b44e79e2406c4da151b9eb6a35756dc2c51c94b1) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] b44e79: lhasa: init at 0.3.1
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: b44e79e2406c4da151b9eb6a35756dc2c51c94b1 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/b44e79e2406c4da151b9eb6a35756dc2c51c94b1 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-10-10 (Mon, 10 Oct 2016) Changed paths: A pkgs/tools/compression/lhasa/default.nix M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- lhasa: init at 0.3.1 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 4d9226: fs-uae: 2.4.3 -> 2.8.0
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 4d9226a0407fd027606cfe2cba10a0025067ec22 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/4d9226a0407fd027606cfe2cba10a0025067ec22 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-10-10 (Mon, 10 Oct 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/misc/emulators/fs-uae/default.nix Log Message: --- fs-uae: 2.4.3 -> 2.8.0 (cherry picked from commit 22a4d6bd54a052be50b14f156b3f3e0241aa09b6) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 22a4d6: fs-uae: 2.4.3 -> 2.8.0
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 22a4d6bd54a052be50b14f156b3f3e0241aa09b6 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/22a4d6bd54a052be50b14f156b3f3e0241aa09b6 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-10-10 (Mon, 10 Oct 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/misc/emulators/fs-uae/default.nix Log Message: --- fs-uae: 2.4.3 -> 2.8.0 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 0e00ab: mysql_jdbc: 5.1.38 -> 5.1.39
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 0e00ab37f891f2c9b887bd5850397438d6f40362 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/0e00ab37f891f2c9b887bd5850397438d6f40362 Author: Graham Christensen Date: 2016-09-24 (Sat, 24 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/servers/sql/mysql/jdbc/default.nix Log Message: --- mysql_jdbc: 5.1.38 -> 5.1.39 Commit: e8cc095b7010d65401e53623370560244a92d260 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/e8cc095b7010d65401e53623370560244a92d260 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-24 (Sat, 24 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/servers/sql/mysql/jdbc/default.nix Log Message: --- Merge pull request #18924 from grahamc/mysql-connector mysql_jdbc: 5.1.38 -> 5.1.39 Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/659803f8c574...e8cc095b7010___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] cd343b: nixpkgs docs: improve node packages documentation
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: cd343b76c7ed7405e97afd2cf5e699d5de657f4e https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/cd343b76c7ed7405e97afd2cf5e699d5de657f4e Author: Langston Barrett Date: 2016-09-15 (Thu, 15 Sep 2016) Changed paths: R pkgs/development/node-packages/README A pkgs/development/node-packages/README.md Log Message: --- nixpkgs docs: improve node packages documentation * be more specific about paths to files Commit: 8b597721f8fefd843307565627eee8312814f1d4 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/8b597721f8fefd843307565627eee8312814f1d4 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-17 (Sat, 17 Sep 2016) Changed paths: R pkgs/development/node-packages/README A pkgs/development/node-packages/README.md Log Message: --- Merge pull request #18633 from siddharthist/doc/node-readme nixpkgs docs: improve node packages documentation Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/afa64a60bc73...8b597721f8fe___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 685786: androidenv: update packages
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 685786b7d7c57a6d80b187f7b61164c36759eb79 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/685786b7d7c57a6d80b187f7b61164c36759eb79 Author: Herwig Hochleitner Date: 2016-09-14 (Wed, 14 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addon.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addons.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidsdk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platform-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-linux.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-macosx.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/repository-11.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sys-img.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sysimages.nix Log Message: --- androidenv: update packages build-tools 25.1.7 -> 25.2.2 sdk-tools23.0.1 -> 24.0.2 platform-tools 24 -> 24.0.2 Commit: 4cbf2b88c28b5754c01d2b568af9550b9ecade51 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/4cbf2b88c28b5754c01d2b568af9550b9ecade51 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-15 (Thu, 15 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addon.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addons.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidsdk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platform-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-linux.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-macosx.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/repository-11.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sys-img.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sysimages.nix Log Message: --- Merge pull request #18591 from bendlas/update-androidenv androidenv: update packages Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/fa507771acfa...4cbf2b88c28b___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] a1b7d2: emoj: init at 0.3.0
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: a1b7d213183cdc21dd367beda7bc804ef23d5f0d https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/a1b7d213183cdc21dd367beda7bc804ef23d5f0d Author: Langston Barrett Date: 2016-09-14 (Wed, 14 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json Log Message: --- emoj: init at 0.3.0 Commit: 36aad71e3c8c2afdfc82855960ff2d91922c0af8 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/36aad71e3c8c2afdfc82855960ff2d91922c0af8 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-15 (Thu, 15 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json Log Message: --- Merge pull request #18610 from siddharthist/emoj/init emoj: init at 0.3.0 Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/fabd60a3978e...36aad71e3c8c___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] d0ee59: nodePackages: regenerate with node2nix-1.1.0. The ...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: d0ee59538616d6db16cffc1ce45e45b218524cc7 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/d0ee59538616d6db16cffc1ce45e45b218524cc7 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix Log Message: --- nodePackages: regenerate with node2nix-1.1.0. The new node2nix supports postInstall hooks that have been used to fix npm2nix (cherry picked from commit 2b144fcfb0df0540b2189d27f5d42819a2813eeb) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 2b144f: nodePackages: regenerate with node2nix-1.1.0. The ...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 2b144fcfb0df0540b2189d27f5d42819a2813eeb https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/2b144fcfb0df0540b2189d27f5d42819a2813eeb Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix Log Message: --- nodePackages: regenerate with node2nix-1.1.0. The new node2nix supports postInstall hooks that have been used to fix npm2nix ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 0b61b0: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 0b61b07335994bfa59979107e7df6e3bc5f908a5 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/0b61b07335994bfa59979107e7df6e3bc5f908a5 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1 (cherry picked from commit 77b9abf78c01d79320353d5f9c1d6d6ed3ef000b) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 36d8ac: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 36d8acec2b08b4e410223dfbfd61895ac39a57c0 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/36d8acec2b08b4e410223dfbfd61895ac39a57c0 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1 (cherry picked from commit 77b9abf78c01d79320353d5f9c1d6d6ed3ef000b) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 77b9ab: disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 77b9abf78c01d79320353d5f9c1d6d6ed3ef000b https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/77b9abf78c01d79320353d5f9c1d6d6ed3ef000b Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.6 -> 0.6.1 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 178282: dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 178282adae8ff3fdede42e0f6f8dd57a453543b5 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/178282adae8ff3fdede42e0f6f8dd57a453543b5 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1 (cherry picked from commit 2edb28ffc53b343ebed5838856afb2249615c287) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] e96a9a: dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: e96a9aa1afe30ef24608352994b148469333f4fb https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/e96a9aa1afe30ef24608352994b148469333f4fb Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1 (cherry picked from commit 2edb28ffc53b343ebed5838856afb2249615c287) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 2edb28: dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 2edb28ffc53b343ebed5838856afb2249615c287 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/2edb28ffc53b343ebed5838856afb2249615c287 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-13 (Tue, 13 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- dysnomia: bump to version 0.6.1 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] Three questions about node2nix
1. Not yet, it will break a couple of non-NPM packages that have
dependencies on them. I'm still in the progress of replacing them, but this
will take some time. Once these packages have been fixed, the old npm2nix
package set is obsolete.
2. At the moment no. Ideally, it would be better to have a more
sophisticated approach that would only regenerate affected pieces while
leaving others intact. I believe this is something nixfromnpm implements,
but node2nix does not having something like that.
3. This is indeed one the packages I have encountered that need to be
fixed. Unfortunately, one of node2nix's undesired side effects is that is
generates a lot of code churn when updating the package set. I guess for
now we just have to live with it.
If it's ok to remove pump.io, then I will do it. We can always readd it
later.
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Rodney Lorrimar
wrote:
> Hello List and Sander,
>
> It's nice to see the all good work done to keep up with the node.js
> enchilada. I have a few questions about what this means for packages in
> the nixpkgs collection.
>
> 1. Should pkgs/top-level/node-packages.{nix,json} be removed now?
>
> 2. Because I would like to update bower2nix from 3.0.1 -> 3.1.0, I run
>pkgs/development/node-packages/generate.sh.
>
>(I noticed that this script could include the special nix-shell
>shebang to ensure node2nix is available when running the script).
>
>Is it possible/desirable to limit version changes to just bower2nix
>and maybe its direct dependencies -- to minimize possible disruption
>to other nodePackages. This whole topic is a can of worms of course.
>
> 3. I "maintain" another node.js package -- pump.io -- which I'm unsure
>what to do with. I was probably too eager to PR this into the nixpkgs
>collection in the first place.
>
>It recently had a 1.0.0 release which contains security-relevant
>fixes.
>
>If I update to 1.0.0 it means dumping another 112K of fluff into our
>git repo. This might be OK if it were for a decent language's package
>system, or if the software had lots of users.
>
>I think the best course of action is to remove the pump.io module and
>package from the main nixpkgs collection. Then maybe put it back when
>it's possible to generate derivations directly from a shrinkwrap.json.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rodney
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Build a default.nix for a project with node.js and python dependencies
A bit difficult to give a very concrete answer, since there are many ways to create hybrid packages. Anyway, a possible strategy is to create a derivation/package that runs pip and keeps the resulting output source tree. Then use node2nix to generate Nix expressions from package.json file that is in the same project. Then override the node2nix generated expression (see the README.md of node2nix how to do this) and point the src = parameter to the derivation that runs pip (and keeps the corresponding source tree). Quite a bit of hacking, but if the steps that you describe are correct, then I expect it to work. On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Dmitry Malikov wrote: > Hey guys, > > There is a project with node.js and python dependencies which is need to > be run inside an isolated environment. > > Right now the whole flow consists of 3 steps: > >- pip install -r requirements.txt --upgrade >- npm install >- npm run build > > What I'm looking for is a single default.nix file built basing on > dependencies listed in 'requirements.txt' and 'package.json' files, > allowing to do these steps via 'nix-shell' command. > > Could you please point me at the right direction? > > Thanks. > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] NixOps usage survey.
We're also using NixOps, as well as some other sub projects (Disnix, Hydra, and "plain old" Nix) in our company. - The following presentation briefly covers Disnix + NixOps deployment (for the impatient: scroll to the last ~10 slides): http://www.slideshare.net/sandervanderburg/deploying-microservices-with-disnix - The following presentation covers mobile app development with Nix and some basic Hydra notes: http://www.slideshare.net/sandervanderburg/building-mobile-apps-with-the-nix-package-manager On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Aloïs Cochard wrote: > Hi all, > > We are experimenting with NixOps and we are having great success. We do > plan to use it for our development infrastructure, and it seems to be very > promising. > > In the light of applying the same technology on our production stack, I'm > curious to know how NixOps is used "for real"? Do you use it in production? > > Do you have some success story to share? > > Would love to know more about how it is used, the size of clusters, ... > > Thanks in advance! > > -- > *Λ\oïs* > http://twitter.com/aloiscochard > http://github.com/aloiscochard > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 4cac90: nodePackages: add svgo
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 4cac903456cc3ab838e8c5be79525b53104ac02b https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/4cac903456cc3ab838e8c5be79525b53104ac02b Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-02 (Fri, 02 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json Log Message: --- nodePackages: add svgo (cherry picked from commit 7bfe580b46c9a87cdc3080d12cc7aeac45831bfa) Commit: fcbaf2bc23dd68b13ae8a93fe752766f3c73aee7 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/fcbaf2bc23dd68b13ae8a93fe752766f3c73aee7 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-02 (Fri, 02 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/default.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/generate.sh A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/pkgs.json Log Message: --- remarkjs: use node2nix generated expressions (cherry picked from commit 0f591992df1e7abe8e324e53a8970e20afac267d) Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/2e9aa13773ed...fcbaf2bc23dd___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 0f5919: remarkjs: use node2nix generated expressions
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 0f591992df1e7abe8e324e53a8970e20afac267d https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/0f591992df1e7abe8e324e53a8970e20afac267d Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-02 (Fri, 02 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/default.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/generate.sh A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/node-packages.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/nodepkgs.nix A pkgs/development/web/remarkjs/pkgs.json Log Message: --- remarkjs: use node2nix generated expressions ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 7bfe58: nodePackages: add svgo
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 7bfe580b46c9a87cdc3080d12cc7aeac45831bfa https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/7bfe580b46c9a87cdc3080d12cc7aeac45831bfa Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-02 (Fri, 02 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json Log Message: --- nodePackages: add svgo ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 0b27b1: wring: use node2nix generated package
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.09 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 0b27b17383c8e8ec24d869b8cb44fa145b5b4897 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/0b27b17383c8e8ec24d869b8cb44fa145b5b4897 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix R pkgs/tools/text/wring/default.nix R pkgs/tools/text/wring/node-packages.json R pkgs/tools/text/wring/node-packages.nix M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- wring: use node2nix generated package (cherry picked from commit 8bedff0e9208a763a6c85b53446b5dcc0e4c55e8) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 8bedff: wring: use node2nix generated package
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 8bedff0e9208a763a6c85b53446b5dcc0e4c55e8 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/8bedff0e9208a763a6c85b53446b5dcc0e4c55e8 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix R pkgs/tools/text/wring/default.nix R pkgs/tools/text/wring/node-packages.json R pkgs/tools/text/wring/node-packages.nix M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- wring: use node2nix generated package ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 20cebe: azure-cli: remove, because it has been supersed by...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 20cebe22c4765b50d6a988a6c31c2d0d502f3516 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/20cebe22c4765b50d6a988a6c31c2d0d502f3516 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: R pkgs/tools/virtualization/azure-cli/default.nix R pkgs/tools/virtualization/azure-cli/node-packages.json R pkgs/tools/virtualization/azure-cli/node-packages.nix Log Message: --- azure-cli: remove, because it has been supersed by a version generated by node2nix ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] fc4e4f: nodePackage: replace azure-cli by node2nix generat...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: fc4e4fe0830916af12ccc740d354f7fa32127c7d https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/fc4e4fe0830916af12ccc740d354f7fa32127c7d Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix M pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- nodePackage: replace azure-cli by node2nix generated expression + add eslint to fix casperjs ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] c6c6df: disable ripple-rest for now and repackage it asap
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: c6c6df3ed8071e137ca4b560185d45d7c871efe9 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/c6c6df3ed8071e137ca4b560185d45d7c871efe9 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- disable ripple-rest for now and repackage it asap ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 6e61df: Fix evaluation errors by replacing npm2nix generat...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 6e61dfb647df78afc65625c057ddef21726b9d28 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/6e61dfb647df78afc65625c057ddef21726b9d28 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- Fix evaluation errors by replacing npm2nix generated packages (will provide alternative for dnchain later) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] b17cd1: androidsdk: fix buildApp and emulateApp functions ...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: b17cd148ba7a9eaadd689c49e8b72c80151dcecb https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/b17cd148ba7a9eaadd689c49e8b72c80151dcecb Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidsdk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-app.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/emulate-app.nix Log Message: --- androidsdk: fix buildApp and emulateApp functions by providing the right executable paths + fix android emulator by adding dbus to the library path ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 216665: titaniumsdk: fix to make it work with new android ...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 21666526b901e3655fd5bdd85546166412d2302e https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/21666526b901e3655fd5bdd85546166412d2302e Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/build-app.nix R pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/cli/cli.json R pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/cli/default.nix R pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/cli/node-env.nix R pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/cli/registry.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/examples/kitchensink/default.nix A pkgs/development/mobile/titaniumenv/titaniumsdk-5.2.nix Log Message: --- titaniumsdk: fix to make it work with new android SDK and NPM packages + add titaniumsdk version 5.2 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 792f50: nixui: migrate to node2nix
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 792f50fe7cb27b977847c947a27c8b27f75d001d https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/792f50fe7cb27b977847c947a27c8b27f75d001d Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/default.nix A pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/generate.sh A pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/nixui.nix R pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-default.nix A pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node-packages.nix R pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/node.nix A pkgs/tools/package-management/nixui/pkg.json Log Message: --- nixui: migrate to node2nix ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 5ce6cd: nodePackages: use node2nix generated package set
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 5ce6cd0106242648ccc9e7ea64716a866eca152c https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/5ce6cd0106242648ccc9e7ea64716a866eca152c Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-09-01 (Thu, 01 Sep 2016) Changed paths: A pkgs/development/node-packages/README A pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v4.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/composition-v5.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v0_10.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v4.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v5.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/default-v6.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/generate.sh A pkgs/development/node-packages/node-env.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v4.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages-v5.nix A pkgs/development/node-packages/node-packages.json M pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix Log Message: --- nodePackages: use node2nix generated package set ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] c4e67a: node-webkit: fix library references with multiple ...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: c4e67a3dc9bf9d592a0c883d0fb124c34eb8378f https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/c4e67a3dc9bf9d592a0c883d0fb124c34eb8378f Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-08-31 (Wed, 31 Aug 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/tools/node-webkit/nw11.nix M pkgs/development/tools/node-webkit/nw9.nix Log Message: --- node-webkit: fix library references with multiple output derivations ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] c643c8: android-platform-tools: 23.0.1 -> 24, etc.
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: c643c860353e2607ca95929ad511b26cc8d13ebf https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/c643c860353e2607ca95929ad511b26cc8d13ebf Author: taku0 Date: 2016-07-21 (Thu, 21 Jul 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addon.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addons.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidsdk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-addons.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-platforms.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-sysimages.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platform-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-linux.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-macosx.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/repository-11.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/support-repository.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/support.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sys-img.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sysimages.nix Log Message: --- android-platform-tools: 23.0.1 -> 24, etc. - `adb` is now 64 bit. Linking against 64 bit libraries. - Added `.lib` or `.out` postfix for 32 bit library packages. - Some libraries are reside in `lib64` instead of `lib`. - Other version bumps. Commit: 659a3bc89bb4b54b9a47c5a0a241ed2835c35c6b https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/659a3bc89bb4b54b9a47c5a0a241ed2835c35c6b Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-07-21 (Thu, 21 Jul 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addon.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/addons.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidsdk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/default.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-addons.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-platforms.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/generate-sysimages.xsl M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platform-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-linux.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platforms-macosx.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/repository-11.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/support-repository.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/support.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sys-img.xml M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/sysimages.nix Log Message: --- Merge pull request #16324 from taku0/android_sdk_24.4.1 android-platform-tools: 23.0.1 -> 24, etc. Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/8f4dcd19f675...659a3bc89bb4___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] c3ffae: nodejs: implement a darwin-specific fix that prope...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: c3ffae477767d22fd0e714e4071fb25e4f3ec8d7 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/c3ffae477767d22fd0e714e4071fb25e4f3ec8d7 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-07-14 (Thu, 14 Jul 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/nodejs/nodejs.nix M pkgs/development/web/nodejs/v6.nix Log Message: --- nodejs: implement a darwin-specific fix that properly refers to tr1/type_traits ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Hi, I just created a pull request for the release-16.03 branch integrating my node2nix generated package set: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/16886 I'm looking for feedback as I haven't extensively tested everything. My stuff seems to work properly, though. If we find the results satisfactory, I will implement the same kinds of changes for the master branch as well. Best, Sander On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Nikolay Amiantov wrote: > One possible way is to add some attribute in current nixpkgs indicating > version of checksumming scheme, e.g. `fetchgit.checksumVersion`. > However, this implies that you would run something like > `nix-instantiate` to determine it, and so you need access to the nixpkgs > tree -- IIRC you don't have such requirements now, and adding whole > complexity for just getting this version seems unreasonable. > > What about pushing different versions of your utility to release and > master branches? I feel this could cover most usecases... > > On 07/11/2016 01:26 PM, Sander van der Burg wrote: > > Thanks for the reference. Actually, the change in Nixpkgs makes sense, > > as I never understood why any file with a .git prefix had to be removed. > > Similarly, I replicated this odd behaviour in npm2nix. > > > > I have managed to implement a fix for this locally (which I haven't > > pushed yet). The only annoying thing is that the 16.03 stable release > > still uses the old git hash computation method, so I need to keep the > > old method intact. > > > > I'm still a bit puzzled on how to proceed -- I could decide to release > > my npm2nix version and use the hash computation method that works with > > 16.03 since that's the stable version and what end-users should use. > > Then for the master branch, people should switch to the development > > version of npm2nix that implements the new strategy. The only thing I'm > > afraid of is that people forget about this and push broken versions of > > the Node.js packages to master. > > > > Alternatively, I could make both strategies configurable through a > > command-line parameter, but this is not very nice either. And still, > > end-users might forget about it and break the package set. > > -- > Nikolay. > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
My personal preference is that the last npm2nix release supports the latest
stable Nixpkgs only. I have noticed that more things (including Hydra) seem
to break after this change in fetchgit.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Sander van der Burg wrote:
> Thanks for the reference. Actually, the change in Nixpkgs makes sense, as
> I never understood why any file with a .git prefix had to be removed.
> Similarly, I replicated this odd behaviour in npm2nix.
>
> I have managed to implement a fix for this locally (which I haven't pushed
> yet). The only annoying thing is that the 16.03 stable release still uses
> the old git hash computation method, so I need to keep the old method
> intact.
>
> I'm still a bit puzzled on how to proceed -- I could decide to release my
> npm2nix version and use the hash computation method that works with 16.03
> since that's the stable version and what end-users should use. Then for the
> master branch, people should switch to the development version of npm2nix
> that implements the new strategy. The only thing I'm afraid of is that
> people forget about this and push broken versions of the Node.js packages
> to master.
>
> Alternatively, I could make both strategies configurable through a
> command-line parameter, but this is not very nice either. And still,
> end-users might forget about it and break the package set.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Nikolay Amiantov wrote:
>
>> This patch is needed to fix sha256 hashes for the old npm2nix -- maybe
>> it would help:
>> https://github.com/NixOS/npm2nix/pull/42
>>
>> BTW, I have updated node-packages-generated.nix with this patch
>> successfully some time ago:
>> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/16137
>>
>> On 07/08/2016 12:11 AM, Sander van der Burg wrote:
>> > Well, for me personally it does not matter that much.
>> >
>> > So far, I have only seen one +1 vote for making my version the new
>> > npm2nix. However, not so long ago, I noticed that there was another
>> > incoming pull request for the vanilla npm2nix. Perhaps the person who
>> > filed it, did not know about the existence of the reengineering2 branch
>> > or this discussion thread. :)
>> >
>> > Anyway, the reason why I still haven't integrated anything yet, is this
>> > issue: https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/issues/7
>> >
>> > When using the master Nixpkgs branch, it seems that npm2nix no longer
>> > computes the sha256 hashes for the git checkouts correctly. Apparently,
>> > some change in the fetchgit {} infrastructure (or a dependency thereof)
>> > causes this, but I don't know why. When using the latest stable branch
>> > of Nixpkgs (release-16.03) everything seems to work just fine.
>> >
>> > I guess this issue needs to be resolved first. IMO it's a bit useless to
>> > have NPM packages set in Nixpkgs with broken Git dependencies, even
>> > though the master Nixpkgs should not be considered stable.
>> >
>> > Besides npm2nix, other generators are affected as well -- bower2nix also
>> > seems to break in one of my use cases. I haven't checked any other
>> > lang2nix generators though :(
>>
>> --
>> Nikolay.
>>
>
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Thanks for the reference. Actually, the change in Nixpkgs makes sense, as I
never understood why any file with a .git prefix had to be removed.
Similarly, I replicated this odd behaviour in npm2nix.
I have managed to implement a fix for this locally (which I haven't pushed
yet). The only annoying thing is that the 16.03 stable release still uses
the old git hash computation method, so I need to keep the old method
intact.
I'm still a bit puzzled on how to proceed -- I could decide to release my
npm2nix version and use the hash computation method that works with 16.03
since that's the stable version and what end-users should use. Then for the
master branch, people should switch to the development version of npm2nix
that implements the new strategy. The only thing I'm afraid of is that
people forget about this and push broken versions of the Node.js packages
to master.
Alternatively, I could make both strategies configurable through a
command-line parameter, but this is not very nice either. And still,
end-users might forget about it and break the package set.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Nikolay Amiantov wrote:
> This patch is needed to fix sha256 hashes for the old npm2nix -- maybe
> it would help:
> https://github.com/NixOS/npm2nix/pull/42
>
> BTW, I have updated node-packages-generated.nix with this patch
> successfully some time ago:
> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/16137
>
> On 07/08/2016 12:11 AM, Sander van der Burg wrote:
> > Well, for me personally it does not matter that much.
> >
> > So far, I have only seen one +1 vote for making my version the new
> > npm2nix. However, not so long ago, I noticed that there was another
> > incoming pull request for the vanilla npm2nix. Perhaps the person who
> > filed it, did not know about the existence of the reengineering2 branch
> > or this discussion thread. :)
> >
> > Anyway, the reason why I still haven't integrated anything yet, is this
> > issue: https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/issues/7
> >
> > When using the master Nixpkgs branch, it seems that npm2nix no longer
> > computes the sha256 hashes for the git checkouts correctly. Apparently,
> > some change in the fetchgit {} infrastructure (or a dependency thereof)
> > causes this, but I don't know why. When using the latest stable branch
> > of Nixpkgs (release-16.03) everything seems to work just fine.
> >
> > I guess this issue needs to be resolved first. IMO it's a bit useless to
> > have NPM packages set in Nixpkgs with broken Git dependencies, even
> > though the master Nixpkgs should not be considered stable.
> >
> > Besides npm2nix, other generators are affected as well -- bower2nix also
> > seems to break in one of my use cases. I haven't checked any other
> > lang2nix generators though :(
>
> --
> Nikolay.
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Well, for me personally it does not matter that much.
So far, I have only seen one +1 vote for making my version the new npm2nix.
However, not so long ago, I noticed that there was another incoming pull
request for the vanilla npm2nix. Perhaps the person who filed it, did not
know about the existence of the reengineering2 branch or this discussion
thread. :)
Anyway, the reason why I still haven't integrated anything yet, is this
issue: https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/issues/7
When using the master Nixpkgs branch, it seems that npm2nix no longer
computes the sha256 hashes for the git checkouts correctly. Apparently,
some change in the fetchgit {} infrastructure (or a dependency thereof)
causes this, but I don't know why. When using the latest stable branch of
Nixpkgs (release-16.03) everything seems to work just fine.
I guess this issue needs to be resolved first. IMO it's a bit useless to
have NPM packages set in Nixpkgs with broken Git dependencies, even though
the master Nixpkgs should not be considered stable.
Besides npm2nix, other generators are affected as well -- bower2nix also
seems to break in one of my use cases. I haven't checked any other lang2nix
generators though :(
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Rok Garbas wrote:
> we can still keep and old version of npm2nix in nixpkgs for ppl who use it.
> and also a branch with old code could be created, for people that want
> pudh bugfixes or develop further (very unlikely).
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Tomasz Czyż
> wrote:
> > Rok,
> >
> > what about people who are already using previous solution? Why break
> their
> > workflows?
> >
> > 2016-07-05 7:36 GMT+01:00 Rok Garbas :
> >>
> >> +1 for just keeping the name npm2nix and bumping up the version.
> >>
> >> i'm not using it on any active project, but i'm going to in the near
> >> future.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tobias Pflug
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Sander,
> >> >
> >> > sorry for my very late response. I'll make this one brief as I am
> sadly
> >> > on
> >> > my phone.
> >> >
> >> > I belong to one of those who tried your new npm2nix and in fact am
> >> > already
> >> > using it regularly. I am very much in favor of having your
> >> > re-engineeering2
> >> > branch replacing npm2nix as the de-facto node integration tool.
> >> >
> >> > I also definitely want to see the current set of auto-generated node
> >> > packages removed from nix. They are almost exclusively *totally*
> >> > outdated.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you a lot for your continued efforts on this. Working with
> >> > npm/node is
> >> > annoying but we are better off with your contributions.
> >> >
> >> > cheers,
> >> > Tobi
> >> >
> >> > On 22 Jun 2016, at 20:24, Sander van der Burg
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hello Nix and Node.js users,
> >> >
> >> > I have been absent for a while in this discussion, but as far as I
> know
> >> > the
> >> > state of the NPM packages in Nixpkgs is still quite bad and despite
> some
> >> > discussions on the mailing list we have not really come to any
> consensus
> >> > yet.
> >> >
> >> > As some of you may know, I have my own re-engineered version of
> npm2nix
> >> > that
> >> > lives in a specific branch in my own personal fork
> >> > (https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2). A few
> >> > months
> >> > ago, I did some major efforts in getting npm 3.x's behaviour
> supported,
> >> > which I have documented in this blog post:
> >> >
> >> >
> http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html
> >> >
> >> > I have been using this reengineering2 branch for all my public and
> some
> >> > of
> >> > my private projects since the beginning of this year, and for me it
> >> > seems to
> >> > work quite well, despite the fact that some of npm 3.x's flat module
> >> > installation oddities are still not accurately supported yet.
> >> >
> >> > I also received a couple of reports from other people claiming that
> >> > their
> >> > projects work and even encountered some people saying that it should
> >> > replace
> >> > the
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Good point! I just also made a change that adds a small disclaimer comment on top the generated expressions. On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Graham Christensen wrote: > You all are great! Thank you so much! > > Graham > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 8:14 AM Kamil Chmielewski > wrote: > >> +1.. I'll do this in go2nix. >> >> -- >> Kamil >> >> 2016-07-05 15:10 GMT+02:00 Rok Garbas : >> >>> +1 ... i did just that recently for pypi2nix. but i'll also add a link >>> to the project home. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/garbas/pypi2nix/commit/339aee3b149909430ebe7e3e27b8cf158addaef1 >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Graham Christensen >>> wrote: >>> > I've found myself confused by multiple projects using the same lang2nix >>> > name, and big changes in format. One consistent complaint I have is >>> the top >>> > of the file usually says: >>> > >>> > // Generated by lang2nix >>> > >>> > but having more information like a version number and a URL to the >>> project >>> > would have saved hours of searching and trying different tools. >>> Something >>> > like: >>> > >>> > // Generated by lang2nix v0.1.0 >>> > // See more at https://github.com/myuser/lang2nix >>> > >>> > would be a really nice usability adjustment. >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 7:36 AM Rok Garbas wrote: >>> >> >>> >> we can still keep and old version of npm2nix in nixpkgs for ppl who >>> use >>> >> it. >>> >> and also a branch with old code could be created, for people that want >>> >> pudh bugfixes or develop further (very unlikely). >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Tomasz Czyż >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Rok, >>> >> > >>> >> > what about people who are already using previous solution? Why break >>> >> > their >>> >> > workflows? >>> >> > >>> >> > 2016-07-05 7:36 GMT+01:00 Rok Garbas : >>> >> >> >>> >> >> +1 for just keeping the name npm2nix and bumping up the version. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> i'm not using it on any active project, but i'm going to in the >>> near >>> >> >> future. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tobias Pflug < >>> tobias.pf...@gmx.net> >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > Hi Sander, >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > sorry for my very late response. I'll make this one brief as I am >>> >> >> > sadly >>> >> >> > on >>> >> >> > my phone. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I belong to one of those who tried your new npm2nix and in fact >>> am >>> >> >> > already >>> >> >> > using it regularly. I am very much in favor of having your >>> >> >> > re-engineeering2 >>> >> >> > branch replacing npm2nix as the de-facto node integration tool. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I also definitely want to see the current set of auto-generated >>> node >>> >> >> > packages removed from nix. They are almost exclusively *totally* >>> >> >> > outdated. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > Thank you a lot for your continued efforts on this. Working with >>> >> >> > npm/node is >>> >> >> > annoying but we are better off with your contributions. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > cheers, >>> >> >> > Tobi >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On 22 Jun 2016, at 20:24, Sander van der Burg < >>> svanderb...@gmail.com> >>> >> >> > wrote: >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > Hello Nix and Node.js users, >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I have been absent for a while in this discussion, but as far as >>> I >>> >> >> > know >>>
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 92ef67: androidsdk: fix rpath that includes 32-bit zlib
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 92ef67b57ce72501c4d5568e97d4871fe40f1bf6 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/92ef67b57ce72501c4d5568e97d4871fe40f1bf6 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-07-07 (Thu, 07 Jul 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/androidndk.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/build-tools.nix M pkgs/development/mobile/androidenv/platform-tools.nix Log Message: --- androidsdk: fix rpath that includes 32-bit zlib ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Ok good to hear! The reason why I would take the pragmatic approach is because I know from experience that any kind of fundamental change (regardless of whether is good or bad) will take time for people to accept. Having two versions makes it possible for people to gradually accept and to smoothly make the transition to a new solution. Forcing people to unexpectedly do this will not make them happy. On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Johannes Bornhold < johannes.bornh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > > On 04 Jul 2016, at 17:34, Sander van der Burg > wrote: > > > > So far only one response... > Sorry, was silent agreement on my end ;) > > > I'm planning to implement the most pragmatic approach very soon -- due > to lack of a better/cooler name I'll rename my fork of npm2nix to node2nix. > > > > Moreover, I will add a second attribute set to Nixpkgs allowing people > to deploy packages that have been generated with node2nix. Also, I will > take the original node-packages.json as a basis, but I will remove the > library packages that I believe that should not be in there. > > > > Because the old package set will still be there, nobody should be > disrupted and meanwhile people can try/test the new approach. > > > > Any objections? > > I've looked into you fork already, looks very positive to me. Appreciate > your work on it and also the in-depth background explanation in your blog. > :) > > I am using mainly pip2nix and npm2nix in my projects to generate package > sets, willing to switch to node2nix soonish. > > From my perspective, I would even take a switch under the same name, even > if it would mean a few hazzles for me potentially to get things up and > running again. On the other side, esp. if people use it and get such a > change as a surprise, it can be negative, since they would be forces to > switch fast or get the old npm2nix available still. At least a fallback > option to get the old npm2nix easily would be good to have if we keep the > same name for the new thing. > > Cheers, Johannes > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
Thank you for the responses so far To remind you about the set of packages I intend to include: I only want end-user software (such as command-line utilities) and packages that are dependencies of non-NPM projects to appear in Nixpkgs. All the other packages will be removed from node-packages.json. On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Michael Fellinger wrote: > For what it’s worth, I’m using the re-engineeering2 branch standalone for > projects with hundreds of npm dependencies. The way I use it right now is > like this: > > https://gist.github.com/manveru/20d22586d9dceae90930be528cbc49ce > > Having it as a part of nixpkgs would be nice, but won’t really change how > I build and use it, and having npm dependencies listed in nixpkgs isn’t > very productive, the ecosystem for JS libraries changes so fast, that we’d > have to automatically update the index every day and hope nothing breaks, > people depending on js libraries listed in nixpkgs will always be > frustrated. > > I prefer having the checksums generated by npm2nix, and giving each app > that is packaged in nixpkgs their own list of dependencies generated by > npm2nix. > > So for now, I think adding it under a different name to nixpkgs and > gradually changing things to use the new approach might be the best > solution. > > There are two things that I’m still hoping could be done better: one is > that the location to the package.json should be more flexible, while you > can specify where it is located when running npm2nix, it won’t be found > later when it’s in a directory above the one you put the npm2nix-generated > files in. I opted for putting npm-generated files into their own > subdirectory, and then run > > `ln -s "$(nix-build ./nix/npm.nix -A > package)/lib/node_modules/myapp/node_modules" node_modules` > > Maybe there’s a better way, but that’s what I figured out on my own. > > On 5 July 2016 at 11:17:05, Tomasz Czyż (tomasz.c...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Rok, > > what about people who are already using previous solution? Why break their > workflows? > > 2016-07-05 7:36 GMT+01:00 Rok Garbas : > >> +1 for just keeping the name npm2nix and bumping up the version. >> >> i'm not using it on any active project, but i'm going to in the near >> future. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tobias Pflug >> wrote: >> > Hi Sander, >> > >> > sorry for my very late response. I'll make this one brief as I am sadly >> on >> > my phone. >> > >> > I belong to one of those who tried your new npm2nix and in fact am >> already >> > using it regularly. I am very much in favor of having your >> re-engineeering2 >> > branch replacing npm2nix as the de-facto node integration tool. >> > >> > I also definitely want to see the current set of auto-generated node >> > packages removed from nix. They are almost exclusively *totally* >> outdated. >> > >> > Thank you a lot for your continued efforts on this. Working with >> npm/node is >> > annoying but we are better off with your contributions. >> > >> > cheers, >> > Tobi >> > >> > On 22 Jun 2016, at 20:24, Sander van der Burg >> wrote: >> > >> > Hello Nix and Node.js users, >> > >> > I have been absent for a while in this discussion, but as far as I know >> the >> > state of the NPM packages in Nixpkgs is still quite bad and despite some >> > discussions on the mailing list we have not really come to any consensus >> > yet. >> > >> > As some of you may know, I have my own re-engineered version of npm2nix >> that >> > lives in a specific branch in my own personal fork >> > (https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2). A few >> months >> > ago, I did some major efforts in getting npm 3.x's behaviour supported, >> > which I have documented in this blog post: >> > >> http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html >> > >> > I have been using this reengineering2 branch for all my public and some >> of >> > my private projects since the beginning of this year, and for me it >> seems to >> > work quite well, despite the fact that some of npm 3.x's flat module >> > installation oddities are still not accurately supported yet. >> > >> > I also received a couple of reports from other people claiming that >> their >> > projects work and even encountered some people saying that it should >> replace >> &
Re: [Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
So far only one response...
I'm planning to implement the most pragmatic approach very soon -- due to
lack of a better/cooler name I'll rename my fork of npm2nix to node2nix.
Moreover, I will add a second attribute set to Nixpkgs allowing people to
deploy packages that have been generated with node2nix. Also, I will take
the original node-packages.json as a basis, but I will remove the library
packages that I believe that should not be in there.
Because the old package set will still be there, nobody should be disrupted
and meanwhile people can try/test the new approach.
Any objections?
Regards,
Sander
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Tomasz Czyż wrote:
> Hi Sander,
>
> awesome stuff.
>
> I would say, change name to something like node2nix and let's merge the
> thing as it looks very good.
>
> Pros:
> - backward compatibility
> - process of merging will be lot faster (IMHO) as it will not collide with
> anything and probably this will limit non productive discussions out
>
> Big thanks,
> Tom
>
> 2016-06-22 19:24 GMT+01:00 Sander van der Burg :
>
>> Hello Nix and Node.js users,
>>
>> I have been absent for a while in this discussion, but as far as I know
>> the state of the NPM packages in Nixpkgs is still quite bad and despite
>> some discussions on the mailing list we have not really come to any
>> consensus yet.
>>
>> As some of you may know, I have my own re-engineered version of npm2nix
>> that lives in a specific branch in my own personal fork (
>> https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2). A few
>> months ago, I did some major efforts in getting npm 3.x's behaviour
>> supported, which I have documented in this blog post:
>> http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html
>>
>> I have been using this reengineering2 branch for all my public and some
>> of my private projects since the beginning of this year, and for me it
>> seems to work quite well, despite the fact that some of npm 3.x's flat
>> module installation oddities are still not accurately supported yet.
>>
>> I also received a couple of reports from other people claiming that their
>> projects work and even encountered some people saying that it should
>> replace the current npm2nix. :)
>>
>> Obviously, I do not want to claim that my implementation is the perfect
>> solution as it (for example) is much slower than the vanilla npm2nix, and
>> it composes the entire set of dependencies in one derivation as opposed to
>> generating a Nix store path per NPM dependency. (I do this for a very good
>> reason. For more details, please read my blog post).
>>
>> Furthermore, I have also spoken to people that suggested completely
>> different kinds of approaches in getting NPM supported in a Nix environment.
>>
>> Something that I have not done yet is investigating whether this
>> reengineered solution could be a potential replacement for the NPM packages
>> set in Nixpkgs.
>>
>> Today, I have been working on an integration pattern, and the good news
>> is: it seems that I was able to generate Nix expressions for almost all
>> packages that are in pkgs/top-level/node-packages.json. The only exceptions
>> were the node-xmpp-* and bip-* packages, but some of them seem to have
>> broken dependencies, which is not npm2nix's fault.
>>
>> If we would proceed integrating, we have a number of practical
>> implications:
>>
>> - I believe it is desired to have both Node.js 4.x and Node.js 5.x, 6.x
>> supported (I actually need all of them). To support all of these, we need
>> two different sets of generated Nix expressions. The former uses npm 2.x
>> with the classic dependency addressing approach and the latter uses npm 3.x
>> with flat module installations.
>> - I think most library packages should be removed from
>> node-packages.json: as explained in my blog post: how a package gets
>> composed and to which version a range resolve depends on the state of the
>> includer. When somebody wants their own NPM project to be deployed, he
>> should use npm2nix directly on package.json, and not refer to any NPM
>> libraries in Nixpkgs.
>> - Some NPM packages must be overridden to provide native dependencies.
>> The mechanisms that the reengineering2 branch use are different. It would
>> probably take a bit of effort to get these migrated.
>>
>> For example, this is how I override the webdrvr package to provide
>> phantomjs and the Selenium webdriver:
>>
>> {pkgs, system}:
>>
>> let
>> nodePackages = impo
[Nix-dev] On npm2nix and the NPM package set in Nixpkgs
, the reengineering2 version is basically a rewrite of npm2nix and quite different than the upstream version. It is written in JavaScript (as opposed to CoffeeScript), has a different modular structure and different command-line interface, so that's why I'm very careful in proposing to replace the upstream npm2nix. Moreover, it also does not share any git revision history with the upstream npm2nix. :) As a final note: for those who do not know about this: the reengineering2 tool can already be used outside Nixpkgs and this is what I have been doing for all my projects. The expressions that it generates are based on the principles I have described in this blog post: http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2014/07/managing-private-nix-packages-outside.html My apologies for this very long email, but I'd like to have your feedback and I don't want my preferences to disrupt other people's workflows. What do you think? Best, Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 1d6cb3: nodejs-6_x: 6.2.0 -> 6.2.2
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 1d6cb3a11908924a4e7496d2b5f48836867682aa https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/1d6cb3a11908924a4e7496d2b5f48836867682aa Author: Christine Koppelt Date: 2016-06-18 (Sat, 18 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/nodejs/v6.nix Log Message: --- nodejs-6_x: 6.2.0 -> 6.2.2 Commit: 483077a4410b535082ad3f21ee585a03efce3c70 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/483077a4410b535082ad3f21ee585a03efce3c70 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-18 (Sat, 18 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/development/web/nodejs/v6.nix Log Message: --- Merge pull request #16314 from cko/nodejs-v6 nodejs-6_x: 6.2.0 -> 6.2.2 Compare: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/compare/ed4869452def...483077a4410b___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] af412f: disnix-module: split dysnomia's functionality into...
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: af412f29c817f0789998b495e369c8abaebcda38 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/af412f29c817f0789998b495e369c8abaebcda38 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-17 (Fri, 17 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M nixos/modules/module-list.nix M nixos/modules/services/misc/disnix.nix A nixos/modules/services/misc/dysnomia.nix Log Message: --- disnix-module: split dysnomia's functionality into a separate module so that it can be used without Disnix and remove the hacky/obsolete avahi publisher (cherry picked from commit 8fccaa901192be95f75412f12f54063196b18186) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 8fccaa: disnix-module: split dysnomia's functionality into...
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 8fccaa901192be95f75412f12f54063196b18186 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/8fccaa901192be95f75412f12f54063196b18186 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-17 (Fri, 17 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M nixos/modules/module-list.nix M nixos/modules/services/misc/disnix.nix A nixos/modules/services/misc/dysnomia.nix Log Message: --- disnix-module: split dysnomia's functionality into a separate module so that it can be used without Disnix and remove the hacky/obsolete avahi publisher ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] ca97cc: DisnixWebService: 0.5 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: ca97cce179b3a4106d0ec6f3560333cdf764cef5 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/ca97cce179b3a4106d0ec6f3560333cdf764cef5 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-17 (Fri, 17 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/DisnixWebService/default.nix Log Message: --- DisnixWebService: 0.5 -> 0.6 (cherry picked from commit fcf72b82ae386bc83fd9a4bd7ed253e22ad30078) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] fcf72b: DisnixWebService: 0.5 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: fcf72b82ae386bc83fd9a4bd7ed253e22ad30078 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/fcf72b82ae386bc83fd9a4bd7ed253e22ad30078 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-17 (Fri, 17 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/DisnixWebService/default.nix Log Message: --- DisnixWebService: 0.5 -> 0.6 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 98fda7: disnixos: 0.4.1 -> 0.5
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 98fda7148e238a56ff5fd1babbf158a1ed8ba7d5 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/98fda7148e238a56ff5fd1babbf158a1ed8ba7d5 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/disnixos/default.nix Log Message: --- disnixos: 0.4.1 -> 0.5 (cherry picked from commit 16bbfe893b25565971ab8a372d30be2f84206583) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 16bbfe: disnixos: 0.4.1 -> 0.5
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 16bbfe893b25565971ab8a372d30be2f84206583 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/16bbfe893b25565971ab8a372d30be2f84206583 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/disnixos/default.nix Log Message: --- disnixos: 0.4.1 -> 0.5 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 50ce58: disnix: 0.5 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 50ce587b93a93b7e2b67f58d9ad4b740e3a7f10f https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/50ce587b93a93b7e2b67f58d9ad4b740e3a7f10f Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.5 -> 0.6 (cherry picked from commit b4315e523f082d305003874703db45c5eda087a7) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] b4315e: disnix: 0.5 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: b4315e523f082d305003874703db45c5eda087a7 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/b4315e523f082d305003874703db45c5eda087a7 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/default.nix Log Message: --- disnix: 0.5 -> 0.6 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] 18b0e0: dysnomia: 0.5.1 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/release-16.03 Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: 18b0e0e25abada46851297563991ccb976d5e1c9 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/18b0e0e25abada46851297563991ccb976d5e1c9 Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- dysnomia: 0.5.1 -> 0.6 (cherry picked from commit c5faa7c83d33a736f2e589ba464fd5f57fbd31bb) ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
[Nix-commits] [NixOS/nixpkgs] c5faa7: dysnomia: 0.5.1 -> 0.6
Branch: refs/heads/master Home: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs Commit: c5faa7c83d33a736f2e589ba464fd5f57fbd31bb https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/c5faa7c83d33a736f2e589ba464fd5f57fbd31bb Author: Sander van der Burg Date: 2016-06-16 (Thu, 16 Jun 2016) Changed paths: M pkgs/tools/package-management/disnix/dysnomia/default.nix Log Message: --- dysnomia: 0.5.1 -> 0.6 ___ nix-commits mailing list nix-comm...@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-commits
Re: [Nix-dev] Question about chroot & nixos-install
Peter Simons wrote (ao): > > I think installing NixOS into a mountpoint from another OS (where > > just nixpkgs available) is a common situation. Anyone to present a > > workable procedure? > > https://nixos.org/wiki/How_to_install_NixOS_from_Linux describes how > to do that using a Live-CD ISO. For some values of workable. When I first stumbled on these instructions I was kinda surprised. I appreciate NixOS is not for Aunt Tilly, but fiddle with mounting ISO images and unpacking squashfs' just to install a Linux OS anno 2016? I guess I'm spoiled by Debian's [1]multistrap, which installs Debian in a directory in 30 seconds by just running 'multistrap -f newos.conf' Sander 1. https://wiki.debian.org/Multistrap ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] yet another npm2nix reengineering attempt
Haha :) Well, I have been thinking about keeping the packages and all their dependencies in their own store directories as well, but I eventually came to the conclusion that it is impossible if you want to support the inclusion of dependencies residing in any of the parent node_modules/ folders. :) Although it would be possible to create store paths for each of the packages involved (with their expected dependencies in their node_modules/ folder, leaving the ones that have been resolved by the includers out), there is yet another problem -- the CommonJS module system dereferences symlinks and looks relative from there. So that means that any package resolves to a path in the Nix store first and then CommonJS looks in parent directories from there. As you may know, the parent of the a Nix store path is /nix/store, which makes it impossible for the CommonJS module system to find any parent modules. :) Second, we can't avoid omitting resolved parent dependencies, because we also have to deal with crazy packages that have cyclic dependencies. The reason that NPM "knows" how to handle them is because it omits dependencies that have been encountered a second time. :) So as you may see: it is all quite annoying and painful. :( Maybe my solution is not the best/elegant, but it at least handles it. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] yet another npm2nix reengineering attempt
It's stateful because the packages that end up in a dependency's node_modules/ folder depend on the packages that have been stored in any of the includer's (parent directory's) node_modules/ folders. When a dependency has been encountered a second time (that fits within a package's version range), NPM will not include it again. For example: if a package would declare a dependency (such as: "optparse": ">= 1.0.3") and any of the parent node_modules/ folders would provide version 1.0.5, then optparse/ will not be deployed again in the package's private node_modules/ folder. Instead, it will be left out and the package binds to the version of the parent. Second, with npm 3.x's flat module installations, we must move packages as high as possible in the nested node_modules/ hierarchy, until a conflict has been encountered. On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Shea Levy wrote: > "including NPM dependencies is stateful" how so? Having separate > derivations symlinked in would give you sharing, no? > > On 2016-03-01 08:15, Sander van der Burg wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I don't know how many of you have noticed my latest blog post > > > > ( > http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html > > [1]), but I did yet another reengineering attempt for npm2nix. Its > > main objective is to also support npm 3.x's flat module installations > > (npm 3.x comes with Node.js 5.x). > > > > In the second reengineered version, I compute the entire dependency > > graph ahead of time and build the entire set of dependencies in one > > derivation -- there is no good reason to make them individual Nix > > packages, because including NPM dependencies is stateful. > > > > The new reengineered version supports both Node.js 4.x and 5.x. By > > default, it generates expressions for 4.x (I made this the default, > > since 4.x is the LTS release): > > > > $ npm2nix > > > > Adding the -5 parameter causes it to generate expressions for Node.js > > 5.x: > > > > $ npm2nix -5 > > > > The code lives in the same repository as the old reengineering > > version, but in a different branch: > > > > https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2 [2] > > > > There is a README.md file that describes how to use it and > > demonstrates a few common use cases. > > > > The flat module installation works for many of my packages but it is > > still not 100% perfect. My blog post describes some of its > > limitations. > > > > Anyway, I'm announcing this new version so that I can gather > > feedback. Maybe this new implementation is not what people are > > actually looking for, but I'm eating my own dogfood with it now and > > for all my own projects it works fine. > > > > Regards, > > > > Sander > > > > > > > > Links: > > -- > > [1] > > > > > http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html > > [2] https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2 > > > > ___ > > nix-dev mailing list > > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] yet another npm2nix reengineering attempt
Hi, I don't know how many of you have noticed my latest blog post ( http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2016/02/managing-npm-flat-module-installations.html), but I did yet another reengineering attempt for npm2nix. Its main objective is to also support npm 3.x's flat module installations (npm 3.x comes with Node.js 5.x). In the second reengineered version, I compute the entire dependency graph ahead of time and build the entire set of dependencies in one derivation -- there is no good reason to make them individual Nix packages, because including NPM dependencies is stateful. The new reengineered version supports both Node.js 4.x and 5.x. By default, it generates expressions for 4.x (I made this the default, since 4.x is the LTS release): $ npm2nix Adding the -5 parameter causes it to generate expressions for Node.js 5.x: $ npm2nix -5 The code lives in the same repository as the old reengineering version, but in a different branch: https://github.com/svanderburg/npm2nix/tree/reengineering2 There is a README.md file that describes how to use it and demonstrates a few common use cases. The flat module installation works for many of my packages but it is still not 100% perfect. My blog post describes some of its limitations. Anyway, I'm announcing this new version so that I can gather feedback. Maybe this new implementation is not what people are actually looking for, but I'm eating my own dogfood with it now and for all my own projects it works fine. Regards, Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] FOSDEM 2016
I will be there as well! Hope to see everyone of you there! On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Emery Hemingway wrote: > Yes, I'm giving a longer version of the lightning talk I gave at NixCon. > Rather than use microkernels to confuse Nix people, this time I will be > using Nix to confuse microkernel people. > > Emery > > > From: zimbatm > > > > One here ! > > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 08:34 Domen Ko?ar wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > who's going to FOSDEM this year? I'm skipping this year - I hope you > all > > > have a really great time! > > > > > > I see there is one talk on Nix: > > > https://fosdem.org/2016/schedule/event/microkernels_genode_nix/ > > > > > > Domen > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Managing private Nix packages outside the Nixpkgs tree
Hi,
Sorry for my late answer. I was a bit busy the last few days. Looks like
Elke's suggestion leads you in the right way. Anyway, if you want to refer
to a custom package registry from a NixOS configuration, you could simply
write a config like this:
{pkgs, ...}:
let
customPkgs = import /home/sander/custom-packages.nix {};
{
boot.loader.grub =
services.openssh.enable = true;
environment.systemPackages = [
customPkgs.mc
];
}
The above NixOS configuration uses the mc package from my private custom
Nix expression, as shown in the blog post.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Matthias Beyer
wrote:
> Hi Eike,
>
> Thanks for your suggestions. I managed to build my own setup, which
> works but is a bit bulky by now.
>
> What I do:
>
> * define what vim-plugins I want to use from upstream (list)
> * define own vim plugins (list, lets call it ownPlugins)
> * Append the lists (lets call it vimPlugins)
> * Override vim
> * Append all plugins to the runtimepath, which means
> * "ownPlugins" is one package, so just append the
> appropriate RTP here
> * Append the appropriate path for each non-ownPlugins vim
> plugin package to the RTP
> * Append vimPlugins list to the systemPackages
> * Append my customized vim to the list of systempackages
>
> I don't know whether the idea "append to the vim runtimepath" is the
> thing that slows down vim at startup, but it seems so. It is a
> slow machine, thought.
>
> I will post a blog article about my vim setup maybe next week, I'll
> notify you as soon as it is online!
>
> On 17-01-2015 18:49:56, Eike wrote:
> > AFAICS, its enough to specify your own definitions in
> > `nixpkgs.packageOverrides'. This takes the original package collection
> > and returns a map with new/overriden packages. I have this setup:
> >
> > common.nix (imported in all machine configs):
> > nixpkgs = {
> > config = {
> > allowUnfree = true;
> > packageOverrides = import ./pkgs;
> > };
> > };
> >
> > then ./pkgs/default.nix looks like this:
> > pkgs:
> > let
> > callPackage = pkgs.lib.callPackageWith(pkgs // custom);
> > custom = {
> > cdparanoiax = callPackage ./cdparanoiax {};
> > ...other packages...
> > };
> > in custom
>
> Looks sane to me.
>
> As far as I can see, your `custom` is a Set here. But
> `environment.systemPackages` must be a list, so how do you convert
> it into a list?
>
> >
> > Since the callPackage function is redefined that way, you can have
> > dependencies between your own packages. Then each directory in pkgs is a
> > package definition just like it is done in nixpkgs. I can then add
> > `pkgs.cdparanoiax' to `environment.systemPackages'.
> >
>
> Awesome! Having dependencies between own packages sounds good to me, I
> will try this out! Thanks for pointing out how it works!
>
> --
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> Kind regards,
> Matthias Beyer
>
> Proudly sent with mutt.
> Happily signed with gnupg.
>
> ___
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
>
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Native dependencies in reengineered npm2nix
I recently ran into a problem with a missing native dependency as well. Fortunately, the generated expressions have override facilities that can be used to manually inject those missing (undetected) ones. I have adapted the README.md file with an example. Maybe that helps! Regards, Sander On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Colin Putney wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm making more progress on converting my projects to use the new npm2nix > generator, but I've run into another issue: how are we do provide native > dependencies for npm packages? > > In my case, I'm using the pg package from npm, which needs to bind to > libpq. With the old version of npm2nix, I just hacked up nixpkgs to supply > the necessary dependencies via nativeDeps. This new version doesn't rely on > nixpkgs, though, and I don't see an equivalent mechanism. > > Did I miss something? How are native dependencies supposed to be specified? > > Colin > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Reengineered npm2nix: call for feedback
I think the problem with relative paths is solved now. Now the directory in which the package.json file resides is also taking into account in the generation process. I tested it against a simple custom-made testcase. On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Sander van der Burg wrote: > Ah a path issue! Well spotted! > > I only discovered this new feature of NPM while writing my blog post and > realized that I have only tested absolute paths so far, not relative paths. > I'll implement a fix for this soon! > > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Colin Putney wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sander van der Burg < >> svanderb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> I've used the reengineered npm2nix on a private project for the company >>> I work for, as well as some other utilities and it seems to work fine for >>> me. >>> >>> Hopefully, you can also try npm2nix on your projects to find out whether >>> there any additional issues. :) >>> >>> Furthermore, I'm still working a blog post to rationalize all the stuff, >>> which should give you better insights in the problem, details and the >>> choices I made. >>> >>> Let me know what you think! >>> >> >> Hi Sander, >> >> I've just tried out this version and I'm finding it pleasant improvement >> over the old way. The generated code is clean and simple, and I like the >> minimal dependency it has on nixpkgs. >> >> However, there's one thing I haven't been able to get working: local path >> dependencies. >> >> I have several node apps that rely on a collection of node modules. These >> modules may, in turn rely on other modules. In addition, both the apps and >> the modules depend on modules from npm. My current setup involves >> generating nix expressions using npm2nix (Sheay's version) to get the NPM >> dependencies, then hand-editing the default.nix files for each app and >> module, to pull in the additional dependencies that don't come from npm. >> >> As of NPM 2.0, dependencies can be specified as paths on the local file >> system, and I'd like to use that feature to generate nix expressions for >> both local and npm dependencies using npm2nix. It almost works, but not >> quite. AFAICT, the nix expressions are generated just fine, but then when >> the derivation is being created, the relative paths are resolved against >> the current directory of the of the process, rather than against the >> directory that contains the package.json file. That causes the derivation >> to fail with ENOENT. >> >> All in all, looks like big improvement! >> >> Colin >> >> >> > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Reengineered npm2nix: call for feedback
Ah a path issue! Well spotted! I only discovered this new feature of NPM while writing my blog post and realized that I have only tested absolute paths so far, not relative paths. I'll implement a fix for this soon! On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Colin Putney wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Sander van der Burg < > svanderb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> I've used the reengineered npm2nix on a private project for the company I >> work for, as well as some other utilities and it seems to work fine for me. >> >> Hopefully, you can also try npm2nix on your projects to find out whether >> there any additional issues. :) >> >> Furthermore, I'm still working a blog post to rationalize all the stuff, >> which should give you better insights in the problem, details and the >> choices I made. >> >> Let me know what you think! >> > > Hi Sander, > > I've just tried out this version and I'm finding it pleasant improvement > over the old way. The generated code is clean and simple, and I like the > minimal dependency it has on nixpkgs. > > However, there's one thing I haven't been able to get working: local path > dependencies. > > I have several node apps that rely on a collection of node modules. These > modules may, in turn rely on other modules. In addition, both the apps and > the modules depend on modules from npm. My current setup involves > generating nix expressions using npm2nix (Sheay's version) to get the NPM > dependencies, then hand-editing the default.nix files for each app and > module, to pull in the additional dependencies that don't come from npm. > > As of NPM 2.0, dependencies can be specified as paths on the local file > system, and I'd like to use that feature to generate nix expressions for > both local and npm dependencies using npm2nix. It almost works, but not > quite. AFAICT, the nix expressions are generated just fine, but then when > the derivation is being created, the relative paths are resolved against > the current directory of the of the process, rather than against the > directory that contains the package.json file. That causes the derivation > to fail with ENOENT. > > All in all, looks like big improvement! > > Colin > > > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Reengineered npm2nix: call for feedback
Just tried building fsevents on my office mac machine both with the old and new npm2nix and both seem to result in the same error. I don't think the problem is caused by the generation, but by something else. Still have to figure out why the header file can't be found. -- Sander On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Sander van der Burg wrote: > Ah I've seen somebody else reporting this issue as well. > > So does the fsevents package compile correctly with the old npm2nix? If I > see the output, apparently some native library dependency is missing that > we somehow have to provide by other means. > > Tomorrow, when I'm in the office (where I have access to a Mac machine) I > can check this. > > Regards, > > Sander > > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Rok Garbas wrote: > >> Quoting Sander van der Burg (2014-10-12 14:21:17) >> > I think most of you probably know it already, but I've written a blog >> post >> > about the reengineered implementation, that can be found here: http:// >> > sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2014/10/ >> > deploying-npm-packages-with-nix-package.html >> > >> > Second, I have some good and some bad news. >> > >> > Good news is that there were a few people lately, having problems with >> > deploying certain packages with the old npm2nix (one time there was >> another >> > cyclic dependency). I tested the same packages with the new npm2nix and >> they >> > seem to deploy just fine without problems. So I think it that the new >> approach >> > really solves some very nasty problems and accurately simulates most of >> NPM's >> > way of managing dependencies. >> > >> > The only bad thing so far is that the new approach is a lot slower. I'm >> > specifically talking about the time it takes to deploy something with >> nix-build >> > or nix-env. >> > >> > The slowness is basically caused by the fact that for each dependency I >> want to >> > include, I have to tell which shared dependencies have been provided >> already to >> > correctly simulate the way version ranges are resolved. I need to run >> semver >> > for this. Moreover, to also prevent infinite recursion because of cyclic >> > dependencies, I use a expression generation trick. >> > >> > I think I already have a few optimizations in mind, but they are >> difficult to >> > implement and I might break stuff again. For example, if I'm absolutely >> sure >> > there are no cycles in a deployment, I can skip the dependency >> generation >> > trick, for example. Question is: how to detect this? >> > >> > I don't think the slowness is problematic for private projects, but it >> might be >> > too expensive to use that for the set of NPM packages part of Nixpkgs. >> > >> > On the other hand, I also think that in the future, most packages >> should be >> > deployed privately in NPM projects. The main reason why I recommend >> this is >> > that version range specifiers do not always resolve to their latest >> compatible >> > versions. The actual version used is context specific -- if some project >> > requires async 0.2.x, the latest conforming version is 0.2.9, but a >> shared >> > dependency is 0.2.5, then 0.2.5 is used. That's why you have to >> reconsider the >> > complete tree of dependencies for every project. >> > >> > The only packages that still need to be deployed from Nixpkgs IMHO are >> end-user >> > utilities (command-line utilities) and libraries used by non-NPM >> projects. >> > >> > So I'm still thinking a bit about it and what I can do to make the >> performance >> > better. In the worst case, I have to throw away the entire approach and >> invent >> > something new, if it turns out that the performance is too problematic. >> > >> > What do you think? >> > >> > -- Sander >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Sander van der Burg < >> svanderb...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > Hi everybody, >> > >> > Since the sprint in Ljubljana until now, I've been working on >> npm2nix's >> > issues. I basically reengineered most of it (e.g. rewritten it to >> > JavaScript and modularized it a bit further) and I think the >> implementation >> > is fairly complete now. I've incorporated as
Re: [Nix-dev] Reengineered npm2nix: call for feedback
Ah I've seen somebody else reporting this issue as well. So does the fsevents package compile correctly with the old npm2nix? If I see the output, apparently some native library dependency is missing that we somehow have to provide by other means. Tomorrow, when I'm in the office (where I have access to a Mac machine) I can check this. Regards, Sander On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Rok Garbas wrote: > Quoting Sander van der Burg (2014-10-12 14:21:17) > > I think most of you probably know it already, but I've written a blog > post > > about the reengineered implementation, that can be found here: http:// > > sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2014/10/ > > deploying-npm-packages-with-nix-package.html > > > > Second, I have some good and some bad news. > > > > Good news is that there were a few people lately, having problems with > > deploying certain packages with the old npm2nix (one time there was > another > > cyclic dependency). I tested the same packages with the new npm2nix and > they > > seem to deploy just fine without problems. So I think it that the new > approach > > really solves some very nasty problems and accurately simulates most of > NPM's > > way of managing dependencies. > > > > The only bad thing so far is that the new approach is a lot slower. I'm > > specifically talking about the time it takes to deploy something with > nix-build > > or nix-env. > > > > The slowness is basically caused by the fact that for each dependency I > want to > > include, I have to tell which shared dependencies have been provided > already to > > correctly simulate the way version ranges are resolved. I need to run > semver > > for this. Moreover, to also prevent infinite recursion because of cyclic > > dependencies, I use a expression generation trick. > > > > I think I already have a few optimizations in mind, but they are > difficult to > > implement and I might break stuff again. For example, if I'm absolutely > sure > > there are no cycles in a deployment, I can skip the dependency generation > > trick, for example. Question is: how to detect this? > > > > I don't think the slowness is problematic for private projects, but it > might be > > too expensive to use that for the set of NPM packages part of Nixpkgs. > > > > On the other hand, I also think that in the future, most packages should > be > > deployed privately in NPM projects. The main reason why I recommend this > is > > that version range specifiers do not always resolve to their latest > compatible > > versions. The actual version used is context specific -- if some project > > requires async 0.2.x, the latest conforming version is 0.2.9, but a > shared > > dependency is 0.2.5, then 0.2.5 is used. That's why you have to > reconsider the > > complete tree of dependencies for every project. > > > > The only packages that still need to be deployed from Nixpkgs IMHO are > end-user > > utilities (command-line utilities) and libraries used by non-NPM > projects. > > > > So I'm still thinking a bit about it and what I can do to make the > performance > > better. In the worst case, I have to throw away the entire approach and > invent > > something new, if it turns out that the performance is too problematic. > > > > What do you think? > > > > -- Sander > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Sander van der Burg < > svanderb...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > Since the sprint in Ljubljana until now, I've been working on > npm2nix's > > issues. I basically reengineered most of it (e.g. rewritten it to > > JavaScript and modularized it a bit further) and I think the > implementation > > is fairly complete now. I've incorporated as much of Shea's > functionaility > > into the reengineered version as I could. > > > > The new implementation handles dependencies in such a way that its > behavior > > is closer to what NPM does. Moreover, it should also properly cope > with > > cyclic dependencies. The way dependencies are resolved is actually > much > > more advanced than the original npm2nix implementation. For example, > it > > uses semver to make matches between version ranges. > > > > In theory, also cyclic dependencies that match on version ranges > should be > > handled properly, although I haven't encountered them yet. > > > > Using the reengineered version is
