fix: x86_64 template

[vilvo]

Description of changes

• fixes Template(s) broken #555

Checklist for things done

• Summary of the proposed changes in the PR description
• More detailed description in the commit message(s)
• Commits are squashed into relevant entities - avoid a lot of minimal dev time commits in the PR
• Contribution guidelines followed
• Ghaf documentation updated with the commit - https://tiiuae.github.io/ghaf/
• PR linked to architecture documentation and requirement(s) (ticket id)
• Test procedure described (or includes tests). Select one or more:
  • Tested on Lenovo X1 x86_64
  • Tested on Jetson Orin NX or AGX aarch64
  • Tested on Polarfire riscv64
  • Tested on generic x86_64 template
• Author has run nix flake check --accept-flake-config and it passes
• All automatic Github Action checks pass - see actions
• Author has added reviewers and removed PR draft status

Testing

$ nix flake new --template github:vilvo/ghaf/issue_555#target-x86_64-generic ~/test-ghaf-downstream-fix
cd test-ghaf-downstream-fix/
nix flake show

[remimimimimi]

nix fmt breaks the template by forcing the removal of nixos-hardware

nix fmt
git status
...
	modified:   templates/targets/x86_64/generic/flake.nix
git diff
diff --git a/templates/targets/x86_64/generic/flake.nix b/templates/targets/x86_64/generic/flake.nix
index ff2606f..61dd35c 100644
--- a/templates/targets/x86_64/generic/flake.nix
+++ b/templates/targets/x86_64/generic/flake.nix
@@ -43,7 +43,6 @@
     ghaf,
     nixpkgs,
     flake-utils,
-    nixos-hardware,
   }: let
     systems = with flake-utils.lib.system; [
       x86_64-linux

Any ideas to resolve this @henrirosten @Mic92 @mikatammi ?

@vilvo You can disable this by stating explicitly that you don't want deadnix to delete this part of code.

[brianmcgillion]

Overall I think that we need to really fix up all these templates, to be more inline with Ghaf and use the exported ghaf modules more. Also I think that the structure introduced by flake-parts is a cleaner starting point that the lib.recursive listed in these templates, so I am not sure if I would encourage anyone to use these templates as is.

[Mic92]

I guess one can have both. For users that just have nixos configurations, not having to understand flake-parts might make things easier as people often struggle with having to deal with two module systems (the one of flake-parts and the nixos one). But as soon you got packages or manage many hosts, that complexity is worth it.