Cross-platform is too wide, there are too many different archs to compile to. We also do not have any cross CI (I don't count the cross Hydra set for master, its not used for gating). We first need to define what archs to support (Tier 2 if I am correct, see NixOS/rfcs#46).

If you need stability I suggest sticking to a stable release.

If you need stability I suggest sticking to a stable release.

The issue is that stable releases usually don't build cross-platform without patching over issues through overlays and the like, hence this PR.

Cross-platform is too wide, there are too many different archs to compile to. We also do not have any cross CI (I don't count the cross Hydra set for master, its not used for gating).

The issue I encounter the most when dealing with cross-build issues is that dependencies are not correctly defined, eg. using buildInputs instead of nativeBuildInputs or using perl instead of buildPerl. These issues should show when building against basically any foreign platform. We don't need to have an air-tight solution here to remove a lot of issues from the current state of things.

We don't need to have an air-tight solution here to remove a lot of issues from the current state of things.

That I agree with.

The issue I encounter the most when dealing with cross-build issues is that dependencies are not correctly defined, eg. using buildInputs instead of nativeBuildInputs

Here using strictDeps = true; throughout would help a lot. Basically one large PR setting strictDeps = true; for all packages that we can cross-compile already would probably go a long way for keeping them working. Maybe we should ask authors to set that attribute?

I am always for being more strict / precise when defining dependencies, but I would estimate that this roughly breaks a shitload of builds with not always obvious solutions, so I doubt a lot of maintainers are willing to go the extra mile if they don't have to.

On the plus side, it seems that @GrahamcOfBorg is willing to build crossPkgs if asked for it. Maybe it would be good if maintainers regularly checked for that when reviewing merge requests?

I am always for being more strict / precise when defining dependencies, but I would estimate that this roughly breaks a shitload of builds with not always obvious solutions, so I doubt a lot of maintainers are willing to go the extra mile if they don't have to.

Setting it in the stdenv, probably, but setting it for packages that currently cross-compile, clearly no. Obviously that is an effort.

Maybe it would be good if maintainers regularly checked for that when reviewing merge requests?

This is just shifting work to others.

I am closing this PR.