Re: [Nix-dev] AgdaStdlib Doesn't install
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 19:40:19 -0700 James Cook wrote: > On 2 October 2015 at 13:12, Taeer Bar-Yam wrote: > > I recently added pkgs.haskellPackages.Agda and pkgs.AgdaStdlib to my > > environment.systemPackages (in configuration.nix), and Agda still can't find > > the stdlib packages. > > > > I discussed this with someone on IRC for a while, and we discovered that I > > don't have an "agda" folder in /run/current-system/sw/share/ which I am > > supposed to have if pkgs.AgdaStdlib is in environment.systemPackages. > > > > Furthermore, when they put the same line in their configuration.nix, that > > folder did appear in their /run/current-system/sw/share/ > > > > I'm sure this will come up, so I'll confirm now: I have `nixos-rebuild > > switch`ed to the new system. > > > > Does anyone have an idea of what's going on here? Is there any other > > diagnostic information that would be helpful? > > > > --Taeer > > Hi Taeer, > > That's really strange. I think you will have to debug this on your > end. All I can think if is to examine every little step that makes us > think putting pkgs.AgdaStdlib in your configuration should make it > appear under /run/current-system/sw/share/. For example: > > - Assumption: nixos-rebuild is reading your configuration.nix. You > could test this by putting some bad syntax at the start of > configuration.nix and rebuilding. > > - Assumption: pkgs.AgdaStdlib produces a "share/agda" directory with > the version of nixpkgs you are using. You could try installing it with > nix-env -p test_profile -i -A pkgs.AgdaStdlib and checking under > test_profile > > - Assumption: Your syntax for specifying environment.systemPackages is > correct. Try putting other packages there and see if their files show > up under /run/current-system/sw/share/. Try putting something that's > not a package there (e.g. the number 42) and see if nixos-rebuild > complains (it should). > > - Assumption: nixos-rebuild is using the version of nixpkgs you think > it's using. You could test this by messing up your nixpkgs (e.g. by > adding bad syntax to all-packages.nix) and seeing if nixos-rebuild > complains. There's also the one that tripped me up: - Assumption: NixOS is mounting /boot properly, otherwise new system generations won't take effect on boot but 'switch' will think everything's applied. pgpBcILLD3FPw.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] AgdaStdlib Doesn't install
On 2 October 2015 at 13:12, Taeer Bar-Yam wrote: > I recently added pkgs.haskellPackages.Agda and pkgs.AgdaStdlib to my > environment.systemPackages (in configuration.nix), and Agda still can't find > the stdlib packages. > > I discussed this with someone on IRC for a while, and we discovered that I > don't have an "agda" folder in /run/current-system/sw/share/ which I am > supposed to have if pkgs.AgdaStdlib is in environment.systemPackages. > > Furthermore, when they put the same line in their configuration.nix, that > folder did appear in their /run/current-system/sw/share/ > > I'm sure this will come up, so I'll confirm now: I have `nixos-rebuild > switch`ed to the new system. > > Does anyone have an idea of what's going on here? Is there any other > diagnostic information that would be helpful? > > --Taeer Hi Taeer, That's really strange. I think you will have to debug this on your end. All I can think if is to examine every little step that makes us think putting pkgs.AgdaStdlib in your configuration should make it appear under /run/current-system/sw/share/. For example: - Assumption: nixos-rebuild is reading your configuration.nix. You could test this by putting some bad syntax at the start of configuration.nix and rebuilding. - Assumption: pkgs.AgdaStdlib produces a "share/agda" directory with the version of nixpkgs you are using. You could try installing it with nix-env -p test_profile -i -A pkgs.AgdaStdlib and checking under test_profile - Assumption: Your syntax for specifying environment.systemPackages is correct. Try putting other packages there and see if their files show up under /run/current-system/sw/share/. Try putting something that's not a package there (e.g. the number 42) and see if nixos-rebuild complains (it should). - Assumption: nixos-rebuild is using the version of nixpkgs you think it's using. You could test this by messing up your nixpkgs (e.g. by adding bad syntax to all-packages.nix) and seeing if nixos-rebuild complains. And so on. Sorry, that's the best I've got. James ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] R 3.2.2
Pushed in 87b75c33ced7a6c34e303662ac9658efaa880218. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] AgdaStdlib Doesn't install
I recently added pkgs.haskellPackages.Agda and pkgs.AgdaStdlib to my environment.systemPackages (in configuration.nix), and Agda still can't find the stdlib packages. I discussed this with someone on IRC for a while, and we discovered that I don't have an "agda" folder in /run/current-system/sw/share/ which I am supposed to have if pkgs.AgdaStdlib is in environment.systemPackages. Furthermore, when they put the same line in their configuration.nix, that folder did appear in their /run/current-system/sw/share/ I'm sure this will come up, so I'll confirm now: I have `nixos-rebuild switch`ed to the new system. Does anyone have an idea of what's going on here? Is there any other diagnostic information that would be helpful? --Taeer ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] R 3.2.2
The attached patch updates R to the latest version 3.2.2 "Fire Safety".
There is a test which fails when R is built without the recommended packages.
This test has been patched to pass.>From 405426538e3ae232f5210048ae2360690d6c5d5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Karn Kallio
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:37:49 -0430
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] R: advance to version 3.2.2.
A test failing without recommended packages has been patched.
---
pkgs/applications/science/math/R/default.nix | 7 ---
.../R/fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch | 24 ++
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 pkgs/applications/science/math/R/fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch
diff --git a/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/default.nix b/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/default.nix
index 0f13faf..79bfef0 100644
--- a/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/default.nix
+++ b/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/default.nix
@@ -6,11 +6,11 @@
}:
stdenv.mkDerivation rec {
- name = "R-3.2.1";
+ name = "R-3.2.2";
src = fetchurl {
url = "http://cran.r-project.org/src/base/R-3/${name}.tar.gz";;
-sha256 = "d59dbc3f04f4604a5cf0fb210b8ea703ef2438b3ee65fd5ab536ec5234f4c982";
+sha256 = "07a6s865bjnh7w0fqsrkv1pva76w99v86w0w787qpdil87km54cw";
};
buildInputs = [ bzip2 gfortran libX11 libXmu libXt
@@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ stdenv.mkDerivation rec {
which jdk openblas
];
- patches = [ ./no-usr-local-search-paths.patch ];
+ patches = [ ./no-usr-local-search-paths.patch
+ ./fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch ];
preConfigure = ''
configureFlagsArray=(
diff --git a/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch b/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..c736c70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/pkgs/applications/science/math/R/fix-tests-without-recommended-packages.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+diff -Naur R-3.2.2-upstream/tests/reg-packages.R R-3.2.2/tests/reg-packages.R
+--- R-3.2.2-upstream/tests/reg-packages.R 2015-08-05 17:45:05.0 -0430
R-3.2.2/tests/reg-packages.R 2015-10-01 02:11:05.484992903 -0430
+@@ -82,7 +82,8 @@
+ ## pkgB tests an empty R directory
+ dir.create(file.path(pkgPath, "pkgB", "R"), recursive = TRUE,
+ showWarnings = FALSE)
+-p.lis <- if("Matrix" %in% row.names(installed.packages(.Library)))
++matrixIsInstalled <- "Matrix" %in% row.names(installed.packages(.Library))
++p.lis <- if(matrixIsInstalled)
+ c("pkgA", "pkgB", "exNSS4") else "exNSS4"
+ for(p. in p.lis) {
+ cat("building package", p., "...\n")
+@@ -111,8 +112,8 @@
+ tools::assertError(is.null(pkgA:::nilData))
+ }
+
+-if(dir.exists(file.path("myLib", "exNSS4"))) {
+-for(ns in c("pkgB", "pkgA", "Matrix", "exNSS4")) unloadNamespace(ns)
++if(matrixIsInstalled && dir.exists(file.path("myLib", "exNSS4"))) {
++for(ns in c(rev(p.lis), "Matrix")) unloadNamespace(ns)
+ ## Both exNSS4 and Matrix define "atomicVector" *the same*,
+ ## but 'exNSS4' has it extended - and hence *both* are registered in cache -> "conflicts"
+ requireNamespace("exNSS4", lib= "myLib")
--
2.5.3
___
nix-dev mailing list
nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
+1000 on just switching, pure-darwin rocks, impure has constant issues and we need more eyeballs. In case of severe breakage we can keep a non-building channel on impure so people can get at the old binaries… On Fri, Oct 2, 2015, 18:10 zimbatm wrote: > Looking forward to see the merge happening. Right now Darwin is totally > unusable for me because of the OSX upgrade. > > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 at 16:52 Eric Seidel wrote: > >> I'm tentatively in favor of making the switch too. I'm going to test my >> environment against pure-darwin this weekend. >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015, at 08:03, Anthony Cowley wrote: >> > >> > >> > > On Oct 2, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Daniel Peebles >> wrote: >> > > >> > > If nobody objects, I think we should just switch over. The only >> people interested in maintaining the darwin ecosystem on Nix don't really >> want to have to maintain two parallel stdenvs, and unless someone stands up >> to fight for the old impure stdenv, I think everyone will be long-term >> better off with the pure one. Yes, there will be some short- and >> medium-term pain during the switch, but there already is with the El >> Capitan upgrade. >> > >> > I vote to go ahead with this, too. Getting just a little help from hydra >> > in terms of binaries will make it a lot easier to contribute to >> > pure-Darwin. >> > >> > Anthony >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Michael Sperber < >> sper...@deinprogramm.de> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Daniel Peebles writes: >> > >> >> > >> > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) >> > >> >> > >> +1 >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Regards, >> > >> Mike >> > >> >> > >> ___ >> > >> 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 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 > -- Wout. (typed on mobile, excuse terseness) ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
Looking forward to see the merge happening. Right now Darwin is totally unusable for me because of the OSX upgrade. On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 at 16:52 Eric Seidel wrote: > I'm tentatively in favor of making the switch too. I'm going to test my > environment against pure-darwin this weekend. > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015, at 08:03, Anthony Cowley wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 2, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Daniel Peebles > wrote: > > > > > > If nobody objects, I think we should just switch over. The only people > interested in maintaining the darwin ecosystem on Nix don't really want to > have to maintain two parallel stdenvs, and unless someone stands up to > fight for the old impure stdenv, I think everyone will be long-term better > off with the pure one. Yes, there will be some short- and medium-term pain > during the switch, but there already is with the El Capitan upgrade. > > > > I vote to go ahead with this, too. Getting just a little help from hydra > > in terms of binaries will make it a lot easier to contribute to > > pure-Darwin. > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Michael Sperber < > sper...@deinprogramm.de> wrote: > > >> > > >> Daniel Peebles writes: > > >> > > >> > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) > > >> > > >> +1 > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Regards, > > >> Mike > > >> > > >> ___ > > >> 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 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] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
I'm tentatively in favor of making the switch too. I'm going to test my environment against pure-darwin this weekend. On Fri, Oct 2, 2015, at 08:03, Anthony Cowley wrote: > > > > On Oct 2, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Daniel Peebles wrote: > > > > If nobody objects, I think we should just switch over. The only people > > interested in maintaining the darwin ecosystem on Nix don't really want to > > have to maintain two parallel stdenvs, and unless someone stands up to > > fight for the old impure stdenv, I think everyone will be long-term better > > off with the pure one. Yes, there will be some short- and medium-term pain > > during the switch, but there already is with the El Capitan upgrade. > > I vote to go ahead with this, too. Getting just a little help from hydra > in terms of binaries will make it a lot easier to contribute to > pure-Darwin. > > Anthony > > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Michael Sperber > >> wrote: > >> > >> Daniel Peebles writes: > >> > >> > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Mike > >> > >> ___ > >> 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 list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Daniel Peebles wrote: > > If nobody objects, I think we should just switch over. The only people > interested in maintaining the darwin ecosystem on Nix don't really want to > have to maintain two parallel stdenvs, and unless someone stands up to fight > for the old impure stdenv, I think everyone will be long-term better off with > the pure one. Yes, there will be some short- and medium-term pain during the > switch, but there already is with the El Capitan upgrade. I vote to go ahead with this, too. Getting just a little help from hydra in terms of binaries will make it a lot easier to contribute to pure-Darwin. Anthony > >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Michael Sperber >> wrote: >> >> Daniel Peebles writes: >> >> > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) >> >> +1 >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Mike >> >> ___ >> 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] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
If nobody objects, I think we should just switch over. The only people interested in maintaining the darwin ecosystem on Nix don't really want to have to maintain two parallel stdenvs, and unless someone stands up to fight for the old impure stdenv, I think everyone will be long-term better off with the pure one. Yes, there will be some short- and medium-term pain during the switch, but there already is with the El Capitan upgrade. On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Michael Sperber wrote: > > Daniel Peebles writes: > > > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) > > +1 > > -- > Regards, > Mike > > ___ > 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] Feature request: replace the Darwin stdenv with the pure Darwin stdenv
Daniel Peebles writes: > Probably obvious, but I'm in favor of switching/merging :) +1 -- Regards, Mike ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
