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
rubyPackages: update #76595
rubyPackages: update #76595
Conversation
nix-review built everything except:
I don't thing this should be a blocker to merge. |
looks like they are ignoring the --with-system-v8=true option now: rubyjs/libv8@c714ddf#diff-e4644139217623558c4f0b5fd4e07805 since version v6.7.288.46.0 |
looks like they are ignoring the --with-system-v8=true option now...
Sigh.
I guess we'll have to come up with a script to prefetch v8 for each
version of the gem or something.
|
I read that they are shipping the gem with libv8 pre-compiled for most platforms. Potentially we just have to patchelf the binary but I haven't checked if it's true. |
I read that they are shipping the gem with libv8 pre-compiled for most
platforms. Potentially we just have to patchelf the binary but I
haven't checked if it's true.
I'd much rather build from source if possible. I wonder how feasible it
would be. It would be a shame to rely on unauditable binaries. (That
might be fine for people using Bundix in their applications, but I think
we should try to avoid them in Nixpkgs.)
|
For that we need some infrastructure from rubygems.
With that in place we will be able to take over the download part with nix. |
What's the status of this PR? |
I would be inclined to merge this. Perfect is the enemy of good. |
Motivation for this change
Noticed
rubyPackages_2_6.gtk2
didn’t build any more. New version seems to fix it.Things done
sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
./result/bin/
)nix path-info -S
before and after)Notify maintainers
cc @