xdragon: Init at 1.1.1 #95925
xdragon: Init at 1.1.1 #95925
Conversation
pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix
Outdated
| @@ -26872,6 +26872,8 @@ in | |||
|
|
|||
| sift = callPackage ../tools/text/sift { }; | |||
|
|
|||
| xdragon = callPackage ../misc/xdragon { }; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be ../applications/misc/xdragon (thats what causes the ofborg error)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Me: "yeah, I can develop this package out-of-tree, what could possibly go wrong"
Also me:
| @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | |||
| { stdenv, fetchFromGitHub, pkgconfig, gtk3 }: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
pkgconfig is an alias
| { stdenv, fetchFromGitHub, pkgconfig, gtk3 }: | |
| { stdenv, fetchFromGitHub, pkg-config, gtk3 }: |
| owner = "mwh"; | ||
| repo = "dragon"; | ||
| rev = "v${version}"; | ||
| sha256 = "sha256-Kq/wiqj9I6W6BnX24Ar7Y4v7PAaXaXEwl80dANL4/zk="; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the convention is to still use base32 hashes:
$ nix to-base32 sha256-Kq/wiqj9I6W6BnX24Ar7Y4v7PAaXaXEwl80dANL4/zk=
0fgzz39007fdjwq72scp0qygp2v3zc5f1xkm0sxaa8zxm25g1bra
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will there be one day where everyone will switch or is there another reason to use non-sri hashes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you can see the discussions here: #89308
essentially, the min-version needs to be at a version which supports it. And I believe it's still at 2.0, but needs to be at 2.2 (could have changed recently)
| sha256 = "sha256-Kq/wiqj9I6W6BnX24Ar7Y4v7PAaXaXEwl80dANL4/zk="; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| buildInputs = [ pkgconfig gtk3 ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for cross compilation
| buildInputs = [ pkgconfig gtk3 ]; | |
| naviteBuildInputs = [ pkg-config ]; | |
| buildInputs = [ gtk3 ]; |
dasJ
force-pushed
the
init/xdragon
branch
2 times, most recently
from
89f1cc1
to
5d52728
Compare
| meta = with stdenv.lib; { | ||
| description = "Simple drag-and-drop source/sink for X (called dragon in upstream)"; | ||
| homepage = "https://github.com/mwh/dragon"; | ||
| licenses = licenses.gpl3; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| licenses = licenses.gpl3; | |
| license = licenses.gpl3; |
evaluation aborted with the following error message: 'Failed to evaluate xdragon-1.1.1: «unknown-meta»: has an invalid meta attrset:
- key 'licenses' is unrecognized; expected one of:
['available', 'badPlatforms', 'branch', 'broken', 'changelog', 'description', 'downloadPage', 'downloadURLRegexp', 'executables', 'homepage', 'hydraPlatforms', 'isBuildPythonPackage', 'isFcitxEngine', 'isGutenprint', 'isIbusEngine', 'knownVulnerabilities', 'license', 'longDescription', 'maintainers', 'name', 'outputsToInstall', 'platforms', 'position', 'priority', 'repositories', 'schedulingPriority', 'tag', 'tests', 'timeout', 'updateWalker', 'version']'
| installFlags = [ "PREFIX=${placeholder "out"}/bin" ]; | ||
| postInstall = '' | ||
| mv $out/bin/dragon $out/bin/xdragon | ||
| ''; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if the intended behavior is for it to be named dragon, we should keep it as dragon. and maybe just add a link to it:
ln -s $out/bin/dragon $out/bin/xdragon
if this was done to avoid the scenario of conflicts with the existing dragon package, then we use lib.lowPrio in all-packages.nix to make the existing dragon prefered
The package is renamed from `dragon` to prevent name conflicts with the existing package as recommended in [1]. 1: mwh/dragon#17
The package is renamed from
dragonto prevent name conflicts with theexisting package as recommended in [1].
1: mwh/dragon#17
Motivation for this change
I use this.
Things done
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"./result/bin/)nix path-info -Sbefore and after)