Revert "Revert "python3: splice python within python3Packages.callPackage""#247245
Revert "Revert "python3: splice python within python3Packages.callPackage""#2472451 commit merged intoNixOS:stagingfrom
Conversation
…kage"" This reverts commit 2ffca30. `793cc9d982415b71cdba729cf779bfc49e9d2ae7` `python3: splice python within python3Packages.callPackage` Was reverted because it broke `pkgsCross.aarch64-multiplatform.python3Packages.cryptography` But by reverting the revert `pkgsCross.aarch64-multiplatform.python3Packages.cryptography` still builds. I tried reverting the 2 cryptography update commits, and it still worked, so I do not know why this would work now.
github-actions
bot
added
the
6.topic: python
|
@amjoseph-nixpkgs Did we overlook something? Why is this working now??
|
ofborg
bot
added
10.rebuild-darwin: 0
What do you mean by "completely fine"? I still see the same diff that I posted here: I'm rebuilding to see if something somewhere else got fixed. If so I'll bisect to find out exactly what. |
yep looks like it should |
|
builds OK Maybe you messed up a merge or something? |
|
Still waiting for my build to catch up.
|
|
FWIW, this is the failure that led me to ask for a revert: Yes, I should have put that in the commit message, not just the in the PR. Still waiting for LLVM. |
|
Ah, from #245475 (comment) one of these things is not like the other. I've seen this before: When I tried troubleshooting #245475 I was so focused on trying to minimize the change to see what part of it caused the issue that I failed to, you know, look closely at the error message. 80% done building LLVM. |
|
Yeah, here's where I saw that before: I have a theory on what's going on here. Will test theory once I have a caught-up build. LLVM is running its lovely 48,200-case testsuite. |
|
Hah! #225360 (comment) |
|
I was able to build This PR is targeted at Rather than try to bisect through all those commits on Building on:
And:
|
|
ghost
left a comment
ghost
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Built (all but chromium+qutebrowser, which are still building) on:
-
x86_64-linuxworkstation packageset -
powerpc64le-linuxworkstation packageset -
aarch64-linuxlaptop packageset (cross fromx86_64-linux) -
mips64el-linuxmixedn32/64router packageset (cross fromx86_64-linux)
I'm still not sure what caused the build failures I saw before. I had a very slightly different version of #212795 in my local tree (which is 112 commits diverged from master); maybe it was that.
ghost
marked this pull request as ready for review
| @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ | |||
| self: super: with self; | |||
| self: dontUse: with self; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we use _ here instead of dontUse?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I want it to be noticeable without evalling that it should not be used, It could be changed to _dontUse if one wanted to quieten deadnix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
BTW, why exactly will this never be useful or usable at any time in the future?
I can see why it isn't useful right now, but it seemed non-obvious to me that it would never be useful. If that's true there probably ought to be a comment explaining it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If super had to be used then it won't be possible to deduplicate and inherits would have to be done manually
keep = self: {
inherit (self)
condaInstallHook
condaUnpackHook
eggBuildHook
eggInstallHook
eggUnpackHook
flitBuildHook
pipBuildHook
pipInstallHook
pytestCheckHook
pythonCatchConflictsHook
pythonImportsCheckHook
pythonNamespacesHook
pythonOutputDistHook
pythonRecompileBytecodeHook
pythonRelaxDepsHook
pythonRemoveBinBytecodeHook
pythonRemoveTestsDirHook
setuptoolsBuildHook
setuptoolsCheckHook
setuptoolsRustBuildHook
sphinxHook
unittestCheckHook
venvShellHook
wheelUnpackHook
wrapPython
;
};calling twice with self probably won't work when the package actually has a difference between self and super, I don't know when that would be the case here or why using super would be necessary here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The best thing to solve this issue would be #228139 and to deprecate python3.pkgs
but it's not urgent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Of course that is assuming I debugged correctly and there's no other issues.
|
This revert did break musl build for me, I see this. I'm getting this error when building pydantic with crosssystem set to musl, and arrived to this PR by bisecting: |
was able to repro with p311 and diff --git a/pkgs/top-level/stage.nix b/pkgs/top-level/stage.nix
index 3886ae04e492..b35d82d31dc5 100644
--- a/pkgs/top-level/stage.nix
+++ b/pkgs/top-level/stage.nix
@@ -204,8 +204,7 @@ let
overlays = [ (self': super': {
pkgsMusl = super';
})] ++ overlays;
- ${if stdenv.hostPlatform == stdenv.buildPlatform
- then "localSystem" else "crossSystem"} = {
+ crossSystem = {
parsed = makeMuslParsedPlatform stdenv.hostPlatform.parsed;
};
} else throw "Musl libc only supports 64-bit Linux systems."; |
|
Weird that this isn't an issue in |
|
I suppose the first thing to try is
|
|
I managed to create a repo where it could be reproduced: https://github.com/takeda/test-app But I see you also were successful at it, so probably isn't that helpful. Thank you for looking into it. |
|
@Artturin so I just tried using cython_3 by adding this override: overrides = self: super: {
pydantic = super.pydantic.overridePythonAttrs (old: {
nativeBuildInputs = (builtins.filter (x: (x.pname or "") != "cython") old.nativeBuildInputs) ++ [
self.cython_3
];
});
};And it worked, but I also observed that no compilation took place. Looks like pydantic fallen back to the interpreted code. |
3 participants
This reverts commit 2ffca30.
793cc9d982415b71cdba729cf779bfc49e9d2ae7python3: splice python within python3Packages.callPackageWas reverted because it brokepkgsCross.aarch64-multiplatform.python3Packages.cryptographyBut by reverting the revert
pkgsCross.aarch64-multiplatform.python3Packages.cryptographystill builds.I tried reverting the 2 cryptography update commits, and it still worked, so I do not know why this would work now.
Description of changes
Things done
sandbox = trueset innix.conf? (See Nix manual)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)