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
pythonPackages.{aadict,,globre,pxml}: init at 0.2.3, 0.1.5, 0.2.13 respectively #84973
Conversation
0494b94
to
3f49f2d
Compare
I get this error when building with
|
probably 3.8 specific. I'll mark that package broken on 3.8 if so |
f4a6e18
to
e1529b4
Compare
Yep, pxml fails on python >= 3.8. Marked as disabled for that version onwards. |
e1529b4
to
0296171
Compare
2a5254c
to
521365d
Compare
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.
It'd be much nicer if these all built on python 3.7 and 3.8, but at least Nix will skip them and their dependencies, so it won't cause build failures in Hydra. Ideally upstream gets their act together!
In the meantime, the actual packaging expressions look good to me.
Result of 1 package failed to build:- python27Packages.pxml 5 packages built:- python27Packages.aadict - python27Packages.globre - python37Packages.aadict - python37Packages.pxml - python38Packages.aadict |
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.
Nevermind, still doesn't pass nixpkgs-review pr 84973
@bhipple should be fixed now - also figured out the way to exclude tests in nosetests which simplifies pxml quite a bit too |
Disabled this on python >= 3.7, since the test suite fails, though I'm sure if someone else wants it on a new python version the test suite could be fixed.
/marvin opt-in |
Hi! I'm an experimental bot. My goal is to guide this PR through its stages, hopefully ending with a merge. The stages are
Anybody can switch the current status with a comment of the form Feedback and contributions to this bot are appreciated. |
/status needs_review |
pxml upstream does not look very lively, it's not building with python3.8 which will sooner or later be the default, and it has no reverse dependencies in nixpkgs... I wonder if integrating this module to nixpkgs is the best course of action. |
It's in my transitive dependency chain because of |
feels kinda bad to have pip packages that exist but can't be installed from nixpkgs, basically always |
Motivation for this change
Needed by asset (coming soon) which is needed by passwordmeter (coming soon) which I need in my application.
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)