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

gi: fix buildInputs vs nativeBuildInputs #88980

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

gi: fix buildInputs vs nativeBuildInputs #88980

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

nagisa
Copy link
Contributor

@nagisa nagisa commented May 26, 2020 •
edited

Motivation for this change

Cross-compilation fails at configure stage otherwise. The cross-compile still does not succeed due to https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gobject-introspection/-/issues/344 but that’s a separate issue entirely, and not something that can be easily fixed in nix.

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 nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-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.

@nagisa
gi: fix buildInputs vs nativeBuildInputs
8739893 
Cross-compilation fails at configure stage otherwise
@nagisa
Copy link
Contributor Author

nagisa commented May 26, 2020

cc @Ericson2314

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from lovek323 May 26, 2020 20:57
NickHu
NickHu reviewed May 26, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@NickHu NickHu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the contribution!

Your changes all look reasonable, but is python really not supposed to be in buildInputs?

@nagisa
Copy link
Contributor Author

nagisa commented May 26, 2020

It might be necessary in both lists. That said it looks like #88222 is significantly more comprehensive, so closing in favour of that.

@nagisa nagisa closed this May 26, 2020
@nagisa nagisa deleted the nagisa/buildinputs-gi branch May 26, 2020 21:22
@Ericson2314
Copy link
Member

I'll try to get that one done soon! Perhaps I shouldn't wait for https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gobject-introspection/-/merge_requests/224

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@NickHu NickHu NickHu left review comments

@lovek323 lovek323 Awaiting requested review from lovek323

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ 10.rebuild-darwin: 1001-2500 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ 10.rebuild-linux: 2501-5000
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@nagisa @Ericson2314 @NickHu