-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14k
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
{flexcpp, bisoncpp}: adopt and update #347109
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
91bbfaa
to
833ff84
Compare
833ff84
to
7588078
Compare
dd186a6
to
e5fffd8
Compare
fe57490
to
c0a68e9
Compare
Newest icmake needs gcc 14 (std c++26). Let's retry. Edit: the most recent does not build. |
a491a02
to
6f72148
Compare
I will try to run the review first, then merge everything. P.S.: It worked! However I can't update it to newer versions for bobcat and icmake. |
9ef4934
to
1ecf12c
Compare
- nixfmt-rfc-style - finalAttrs - strictDeps - hammer - no nested with - more meta attrs
As a reverse dependency.
- factor gpl license reference - nixfmt-rfc-style - hammer - finalAttrs - strictDeps - runHooks - no nested with
- nixfmt-rfc-style - finalAttrs - strictDeps - hammer - no nested with - more meta attrs
- finalAttrs - hammer - nixfmt-rfc-style - adoption
1ecf12c
to
0e6fa10
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.
Changes look good
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ | |||
{ | |||
lib, | |||
bisoncpp, |
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.
I'm a little confused about this "recursive dependency" 🤔
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.
I think I figured out, thanks.
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.
Line 61.
This is a more or less typical design pattern: we tests reverse dependencies so that we can guarrantee that e.g. updating flexcpp does not break existing bisoncpp.
You can see a similar thing at live555.
Hmm, a part of that is GCC-only upstream? |
Yes, mostly because it hardcodes |
Should we mark it Darwin-unsupported then? |
Given that I can't care for Darwin, maybe yes. |
@AndersonTorres I can test for Darwin later (it's important for me, frankly speaking 🥺), would you mind keep this PR opened for some time? |
Yep. |
@rennsax Note that ofBorg reports build failures there so some fixing will be needed |
Closes #347051
Things done
nix.conf
? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxed
sandbox = true
nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD"
. Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/
)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.