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

consider using nix-update #402

Open
colemickens opened this issue Mar 27, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

consider using nix-update #402

colemickens opened this issue Mar 27, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@colemickens
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@colemickens
Copy link
Member Author

cc: @Artturin I started using nix-update for my own pkgs in my personal nix config and it seems to work well. I'm always down to delete code I don't want to maintain.

The only thing is, I'm not sure about how to handle it with the "override nixpkgs" concept we have going here and that you made nicer somewhat recently.

It might be possible, actually, to use nix-update and one of the options to tell it to use a different file for the replacement, instead of the pkg definition loc.

Just leaving this here as a note, and if you have any thoughts about it.

@Artturin
Copy link
Member

Artturin commented Apr 6, 2023

this should be useful for us NixOS/nixpkgs#205264

nix-update has a run update scripts (passthru.updateScript, see --use-update-script flag)

@colemickens
Copy link
Member Author

I think with --override-filename that shouldn't even be necessary. I haven't read nix-update fully, but I assume it evals the pkg, uses nix's internal location to update the file. With --override-filename, presumably it should work and then just update the metadata.nix that is consistently used for all pkgs anyway.

Eventually I'll poke at it...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants