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

patchutils: 0.3.3 -> 0.3.4, keep 0.3.3 for fetchpatch #59422

Merged
merged 5 commits into from May 12, 2019
Merged

patchutils: 0.3.3 -> 0.3.4, keep 0.3.3 for fetchpatch #59422

merged 5 commits into from May 12, 2019

Conversation

bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Member

@bobvanderlinden bobvanderlinden commented Apr 13, 2019 •
edited

Motivation for this change

See #38618

Closes #38618

This upgrades patchutils from 0.3.3 -> 0.3.4. However, there were issues with its usage from fetchpatch combined with patchutils 0.3.4. One of the possible solutions that was raised by @dezgeg was to add both versions of patchutils. That is what I have attempted to to in this PR.

To test whether fetchpatch still works:

nix-build -A pkgs.clightning.patches .

Tried the following to see whether both versions of patchutils are working:

nix-build -A pkgs.patchutils_0_3_3 .
result/bin/lsdiff
nix-build -A pkgs.patchutils_0_3_4 .
result/bin/lsdiff
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.

@veprbl
Copy link
Member

veprbl commented Apr 15, 2019

@GrahamcOfBorg build patchutils patchutils_0_3_3

@bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Member Author

bobvanderlinden commented Apr 16, 2019 •
edited

Looking into the earlier problem with fetchpatch again it is a good idea to try building octoprint-plugins.m33-fio and check whether the sources are fetched with different hashes.

#25154

@bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Member Author

I tested this with fetchpatch from aacgain by changing the hash within the fetchpatch statement. After that I tried running the build and it came up with the same hash every time:

hash mismatch in fixed-output derivation '/nix/store/8vvimzv9a47rl56j400c8i97yrmbszk6-fix_missing_ptr_deref.patch':
  wanted: sha256:1cq7r005nvmwdjb25z80grcam7jv6k57jnl2bh349mg3ajmslbqa
  got:    sha256:1cq7r005nvmwdjb25z80grcam7jv6k57jnl2bh349mg3ajmslbq9

This seems safe to use now for fetchpatch.

@bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Member Author

@abbradar @vcunat Could you check whether this indeed fixes the issue you encountered in #25154?

vcunat
vcunat approved these changes May 12, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@vcunat vcunat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code seems good. I also checked fetchpatch on a few places (like GitHub).

@vcunat vcunat mentioned this pull request May 12, 2019
Closed
8 tasks
@vcunat vcunat merged commit 1d883a0 into NixOS:master May 12, 2019
vcunat added a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2019
@vcunat
Merge #59422: patchutils: 0.3.3 -> 0.3.4, keep 0.3.3 for fetchpatch
0fb181b
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@veprbl veprbl veprbl left review comments

@vcunat vcunat vcunat approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
6.topic: fetch 8.has: package (new) 8.has: package (update) 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 11-100
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@bobvanderlinden @veprbl @vcunat @infinisil @GrahamcOfBorg