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

Jump to bottom

nixos/version: PRETTY_NAME in /etc/os-release uses the release now #74850

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 3, 2019
Merged

nixos/version: PRETTY_NAME in /etc/os-release uses the release now #74850

merged 1 commit into from Dec 3, 2019

Conversation

davidak
Copy link
Member

@davidak davidak commented Dec 2, 2019

instead of full version to be more suitable for presentation to the user

VirtualBox_TEST_02_12_2019_19_46_58

Screenshot from 2019-12-02 20-05-24

Motivation for this change

Fix #74276

This fits the purpose of PRETTY_NAME more:

A pretty operating system name in a format suitable for presentation to the user. May or may not contain a release code name or OS version of some kind, as suitable. If not set, defaults to "PRETTY_NAME="Linux"". Example: "PRETTY_NAME="Fedora 17 (Beefy Miracle)"".

https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html

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 @edolstra

@davidak
nixos/version: PRETTY_NAME in /etc/os-release uses the release now in…
0ba3761 
…stead of full version

to be more suitable for presentation to the user
@edolstra edolstra merged commit 56588e9 into NixOS:master Dec 3, 2019
@davidak davidak deleted the PRETTY_NAME branch December 3, 2019 14:12
@aanderse
Copy link
Member

aanderse commented Dec 3, 2019

I wonder if this will fix the VMWare vSphere output... 🤔

Screenshot_20191203_091745

@davidak
Copy link
Member Author

davidak commented Dec 3, 2019

@aanderse they seem to include the whole file, so it would just be different content.

you could start it with strace to see which system call they use to get it. maybe you could add lsb_release to the dependencies to get a cleaner output?

@aanderse
Copy link
Member

aanderse commented Dec 3, 2019

I have never really looked into it. I'm not sure if the vmware client running on the vm reports that info, or if vSphere grabs the data 🤷‍♂️ A nice to have, but oh well...

@davidak
Copy link
Member Author

davidak commented Dec 3, 2019

@aanderse you can create an issue and maybe someone will look into it.

@aanderse
Copy link
Member

aanderse commented Dec 3, 2019

@davidak it requires someone with vSphere... which is me. My impression is that @peterhoeg and I are among the few only people using NixOS on VMWare. Maybe one day I'll spend a few minutes playing around with it to figure it out.

@Izorkin Izorkin mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@edolstra edolstra edolstra left review comments

@c0bw3b c0bw3b c0bw3b approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
6.topic: nixos 8.has: changelog 8.has: documentation 8.has: module (update) 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 10.rebuild-linux: 0
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

UX: Should we use a NixOS short version?
4 participants
@davidak @aanderse @edolstra @c0bw3b