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

grafx2: 2.4 -> 2.6 #57739

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

grafx2: 2.4 -> 2.6 #57739

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

bb010g
Copy link
Member

@bb010g bb010g commented Mar 16, 2019

Motivation for this change

Upgrading Grafx2 to an actively maintained release, as well as ensuring at least one distribution actually attempts truer source builds of dependencies like recoil.

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 nox --run "nox-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): adds 421.7kb
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Upgrades Grafx2 from 2.4 to 2.6, introduces its dependency RECOIL at 4.3.1, and introduces RECOIL's dependency cito at the latest release 0.4 and the latest Git revision 8cd935e.

As I was implementing grafx2's postFetch hook to insert a revision version file normally included from tarballs, I noticed that fetchFromGitHub is inconsistent in how postFetch works due to using either fetchzip (uses postFetch, so user extends on extraPostFetch) or fetchgit (extends on postFetch). The first commit standardizes postFetch over forge fetchers and updates all usages in Nixpkgs as needed.

The postFetch argument now works as expected regardless of the fetching
method used for the major forges. If specialization is needed for
directly overriding the fetcher arguments, that is also available with
gitPostFetch, zipPostFetch, and zipExtraPostFetch.

This should make fetchFromGitHub's postFetch in particular less
surprising.
recoil: init at 4.3.1
cito: init at 0.4 and Git HEAD

These extra packages allow for a more comprehensive build from source
for GrafX2.
@veprbl
Copy link
Member

veprbl commented Apr 11, 2019

Can you please split this into two PR's? Also for fetchFrom change, I think, you need to explain much more about what you are trying to achieve here. The big diff doesn't help with ease of review, splitting into smaller commits should help. Some other questions: is this change backward compatible? What steps did you already take to check that this doesn't break anything?

@risicle
Copy link
Contributor

risicle commented Apr 13, 2019

Hmm this builds for me on non-nixos linux x86_64 but grafx2 segfaults for me just after it spawns a window:

#0  0x00007ffff79505e7 in __memcpy_ssse3 () from /nix/store/681354n3k44r8z90m35hm8945vsp95h1-glibc-2.27/lib/libc.so.6
#1  0x0000000000418b9c in GFX2_UpdateRect ()
#2  0x0000000000418f97 in Flush_update ()
#3  0x00000000004769eb in Get_input ()
#4  0x000000000044b176 in Window_clicked_button ()
#5  0x000000000046c740 in Verbose_message ()
#6  0x0000000000407705 in Init_program ()
#7  0x0000000000407f96 in main ()

@veprbl
Copy link
Member

veprbl commented Dec 27, 2019

@bb010g Are you still interested in finishing this?

@miniupnp
Copy link

grafx2 2.7 is out ! ;)

@bb010g
Copy link
Member Author

bb010g commented Feb 26, 2020

Sorry about the delay. Currently reworking this with better style. First commit (cito) is up at bb010g/nixpkgs@14eb843 (on the bb010g:grafx2-2.6-neo branch), and I'll get rid of that branch once Grafx2 is actually included again.

There's a strange stripping/dotnet/.NET Core interaction detailed in cito/unstable.nix if anyone wants to figure that out.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Aug 24, 2020

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.

@stale stale bot added the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label Aug 24, 2020
@miniupnp
Copy link

@bb010g what's the status ?

@stale stale bot removed the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label Sep 20, 2020
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 6, 2021

I marked this as stale due to inactivity. → More info

@stale stale bot added the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label Jun 6, 2021
@rapenne-s
Copy link
Member

Could you rebase your work on a recent commit and focus on upgrading grafx2 first?

aed0528 should not be mixed with updating grafx2

@stale stale bot removed the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label May 10, 2022
@stale stale bot added the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label Nov 12, 2022
@jchv jchv mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2023
12 tasks
@AndersonTorres
Copy link
Member

Closing as dead.

@stale stale bot removed the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label May 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants