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
imagemagick: add liquid rescale build option #83149
imagemagick: add liquid rescale build option #83149
Conversation
Hello, I'm a bot and I thank you in the name of the community for your contributions. Nixpkgs is a busy repository, and unfortunately sometimes PRs get left behind for too long. Nevertheless, we'd like to help committers reach the PRs that are still important. This PR has had no activity for 180 days, and so I marked it as stale, but you can rest assured it will never be closed by a non-human. If this is still important to you and you'd like to remove the stale label, we ask that you leave a comment. Your comment can be as simple as "still important to me". But there's a bit more you can do: If you received an approval by an unprivileged maintainer and you are just waiting for a merge, you can @ mention someone with merge permissions and ask them to help. You might be able to find someone relevant by using Git blame on the relevant files, or via GitHub's web interface. You can see if someone's a member of the nixpkgs-committers team, by hovering with the mouse over their username on the web interface, or by searching them directly on the list. If your PR wasn't reviewed at all, it might help to find someone who's perhaps a user of the package or module you are changing, or alternatively, ask once more for a review by the maintainer of the package/module this is about. If you don't know any, you can use Git blame on the relevant files, or GitHub's web interface to find someone who touched the relevant files in the past. If your PR has had reviews and nevertheless got stale, make sure you've responded to all of the reviewer's requests / questions. Usually when PR authors show responsibility and dedication, reviewers (privileged or not) show dedication as well. If you've pushed a change, it's possible the reviewer wasn't notified about your push via email, so you can always officially request them for a review, or just @ mention them and say you've addressed their comments. Lastly, you can always ask for help at our Discourse Forum, or more specifically, at this thread or at #nixos' IRC channel. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"--with-lqr=yes"
probably works just as "--with-lqr"
without the =yes
.
This seems like it might be useful to some people? Idk how the feature set of packages like this is decided on, tbh.
You're right, I can definitely remove the --yes part. I ran into this as a feature that I wanted when running imagemagick. Maybe this is easy thing to add in via an overlay? On gentoo, I enabled this with a useflag. Nix doesn't look like it has an equivalent to useflags, though. In any case, it seems worthwhile to take note of it somewhere in case someone else runs into this problem. |
This looks great! IMHO packages in nixpkgs should always be built with the maximum set of features enabled. (Because it's hard to substitute e.g. imagemagick with your own version if it is used as a dependency by something else.)
|
100 are fine. |
7f4a445
to
fad3bc1
Compare
Thanks for the feedback! Per SuperSandro2000's suggestion, I've left this on master. I've made the recommended modifications. Sorry for the long delay on fixing this. Changes:
Hopefully this passes CI. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
diff LGTM
This is a semi-automatic executed nixpkgs-review which is checked by a human on a best effort basis and does not build all packages (e.g. lumo, tensorflow or pytorch). Result of 1 package built:
The following issues got detected with the above build packages. imagemagick: Please consider this feature to be alpha. A substituteInPlace with an unused --replace got detected:
Please check the offending substituteInPlace for typos or changes in source. |
Hmm... not really sure what to make of this error. I'm not able to reproduce it. To try and reproduce, I cloned my branch of nixpkgs, changed It's worth noting I'm only on x86-64. Perhaps the bot built it on another arch? I thought there might be a test in nixos/tests, but I'm not seeing anything. @SuperSandro2000 any idea how to reproduce this error? |
This is not an error but additional feedback.
Only building on amd64. When you take a look at https://github.com/DieracDelta/nixpkgs/blob/fix/imagemagick-default/pkgs/applications/graphics/ImageMagick/default.nix#L89 you will see the lines mentioned in the comment. They are not actually applied. Maybe they need an update or are outdated and can be removed. |
This is a semi-automatic executed nixpkgs-review with nixpkgs-review-checks extension. It is checked by a human on a best effort basis and does not build all packages (e.g. lumo, tensorflow or pytorch). Result of 6 packages built:
The following issues got detected with the above build packages.
imagemagick:
Please consider this feature to be alpha. A substituteInPlace with an unmatched pattern got detected:
Please check the offending substituteInPlace for typos or changes in source. |
I forgot this PR. @DieracDelta Can you rebase it and resolve the merge conflict? |
fad3bc1
to
77c3d60
Compare
@SuperSandro2000 rebased. Built the packages on my system for a x86-64 linux target, and they seem to work fine. 👍 Note that if the substituteInPlace error shows up again for imagemagick 6, I can delete the substitute in place lines (this entire for-loop). I built the package with them deleted without a hitch, and it seems to run. I'm not sure why it's there in the first place, though so there may be unintended side effects. In either case that might be better as a separate PR. |
I think those are only doing something when you are consuming imagemagick as a library. It would be better to remove that in a separate PR to get this PR faster merged. Also when I look at the amount of rebuilds we need to target staging here. |
Switched to staging. (and I did not include that change in this PR, so we should be set there) |
Motivation for this change
It is not currently possible to build imagemagick with liquid rescaling on nix without an overlay.
Things done
This PR adds a optional dependency on liblqr1. If this library exists, imagemagick builds with with liquid rescale support.
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)