Skip to content

iamy: 2.1.1 -> 2.3.2 #62613

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2019
Merged

iamy: 2.1.1 -> 2.3.2 #62613

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2019
+10 −4

Conversation

suvash
Copy link
Contributor

@suvash suvash commented Jun 3, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Motivation for this change
Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • 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)
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Sorry, something went wrong.

mmahut
mmahut approved these changes Jun 3, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@mmahut mmahut left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • reviewed the diff and commit messages
  • made sure ofBorg build eval
  • run nix-review without any failures
  • run and tested the binaries

Sorry, something went wrong.

marsam
marsam reviewed Jun 4, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@marsam marsam left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like upstream uses go modules, would you mind updating the expression to buildGoModule?

dtzWill
dtzWill suggested changes Jun 4, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dtzWill dtzWill left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Instead of deps.nix (bit of a pain to maintain and sometimes significant in size), it looks like upstream moved to new go mod goodness (go.mod and go.sum indicate this), so instead of buildGoPackages and deps.nix you can use buildGoModule and modSha256. Bonus is we aren't duplicating upstream's information about pinned dependencies :).

EDIT: oops missed @marsam's comment, which suggests this as well :).

@suvash
Copy link
Contributor Author

suvash commented Jun 13, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@marsam @dtzWill finally had the time to look into this again. Tested on my local nixOS installation, and works fine. Let me know if I've missed sth else.

EDIT: also, not a big deal, but I'm curious if there's an example of a buildGoModule to pass in flags used during compilation of the binary. Sort of what's done here. https://github.com/99designs/iamy/blob/master/Makefile#L19
I just fixed this as well. ^^

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from kalbasit June 13, 2019 15:52
@ofborg ofborg bot added the 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes label Jun 13, 2019
@kalbasit
Copy link
Member

@GrahamcOfBorg build iamy

@kalbasit kalbasit merged commit 7815c86 into NixOS:master Jun 13, 2019
@suvash suvash deleted the patch-1 branch November 10, 2023 15:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@marsam marsam

@dtzWill dtzWill

@kalbasit kalbasit

@mmahut mmahut

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@suvash @kalbasit @marsam @mmahut @dtzWill