qt5-packages.nix: consistently make all libraries with same qt5 version#102168
qt5-packages.nix: consistently make all libraries with same qt5 version#102168FRidh merged 4 commits intoNixOS:stagingfrom
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
be86aed to
c1d711c
Compare
|
Long term thinking: How about changing a bit the attributes layout to look like this (json5): qt5 = {
// Same as today
qtbase = ..
// Other qt modules
libraries = {
// All what was previously in libsForQt5
},
apps = {
// the apps from qt5-applications.nix
}
}And so on, with |
I don't really like this beacuse, as you rightly pointed out, the distinction between "library" and "application" is flexible. I suggest the following, which I think is the same as the situation for Python right now:
I think this would fix the mixed-version problems we have. The one problem: I don't know how to make this work with PyQt packages; they would somehow need to live in two package sets at once. I guess we can leave PyQt in |
|
For clarity I've kept If what's here now is fine, I'll move over more |
Did not do this eventually and this is now a follow-up task. Resolved the merge conflicts and merged this to avoid getting more conflicts. |
|
This PR broke eval on staging because fcitx-qt5 is no longer available. 2e9c639#diff-ab5748dc9567516fefba8344056b51ec1866adeace380f46e58a7af3d619ea22L15904 |
|
Rather, EDIT: #108950 is where this cropped up. |
|
Thanks. Fixed with 05ca995. |
|
Is there an additional change to turn |
|
or |
If you have scope |
Motivation for this change
Reduce the chance of mixing Qt versions by having Qt-based libraries in a separate package set.
Builds upon #101369.
Things done
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"./result/bin/)nix path-info -Sbefore and after)To do
callPackageintoqt-packages.nixmakeScopeusage for Qt and such itself is going to make this difficultlibsForQt5