Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

nixos/matomo: backport module fix (19.09) #73692

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 18, 2019

Conversation

mmilata
Copy link
Member

@mmilata mmilata commented Nov 18, 2019

This is a backport of #69342.

Motivation for this change

The matomo module is broken in NixOS 19.09 as evidenced by the attached test:

$ nix-build nixos/tests/matomo.nix
error: The option `services.phpfpm.pools.matomo.user' is used but not defined.
(use '--show-trace' to show detailed location information)
Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nix-review --run "nix-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.
Notify maintainers

cc @Kiwi @florianjacob @aanderse

mmilata and others added 2 commits November 18, 2019 16:47
cherry-pick: removed matomo-beta test because there's no beta package
Fixes the phpfpm deprecation warnings about listen and extraConfig by
using fpm.socket and settings. Removes phpfpmProcessManagerConfig.
@mmilata mmilata changed the title nixos/matomo: backport module fix nixos/matomo: backport module fix (19.09) Nov 18, 2019
@mmilata mmilata mentioned this pull request Nov 18, 2019
10 tasks
@Kiwi
Copy link
Member

Kiwi commented Nov 18, 2019

Thank you. That's one less thing I have to do this week that I was planning (OK, hoping) to get done. I'm conflicted about dropping the beta. To be clear, not having the beta build is fine with me, it's the lack of 3.12 that I don't like. If we can backport 3.12 (which should be ready soon) to 19.09 I'd be happy; it did fix at least one rather annoying bug. (Personally, it doesn't affect me, as I run nixos-unstable, but most people will have a broken version)

@mmilata
Copy link
Member Author

mmilata commented Nov 18, 2019

@Kiwi what is needed to have 3.12 in unstable? #73577?

@Kiwi
Copy link
Member

Kiwi commented Nov 18, 2019

As I understand it; @florianjacob and the Matomo people figured out the change that broke it and it will be fixed upstream going forward. It's not in a release yet; but we know what to patch. We're planning on making time to work on that and the systemd changes in the next few days.

Copy link
Contributor

@florianjacob florianjacob left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!
Yes, we should have a 3.12-stable PR soon which will be backported to nixos-19.09 due to (minor) security issues, so matomo-beta is not needed on nixos-19.09. In case 3.13 is not security critical, it might make sense to backport the multi-version infrastructure and offer nixos-19.09 user the manual upgrade to 3.13, but we'll see how that will play out.

@aanderse
Copy link
Member

Quick glance over code looks fine. I haven't tested or reviewed in detail, but merging based on approval of @florianjacob so we can quickly fix issue in stable release. Thanks to all for work on this!

@aanderse
Copy link
Member

@GrahamcOfBorg test matomo

@aanderse aanderse merged commit e184364 into NixOS:release-19.09 Nov 18, 2019
@mmilata mmilata deleted the matomo-fix19.09 branch November 18, 2019 23:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants