Skip to content

Conversation

@NickCao
Copy link
Member

@NickCao NickCao commented Jan 11, 2024

Description of changes

Fixes #280123

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@NickCao

This comment was marked as outdated.

@NickCao NickCao marked this pull request as ready for review January 11, 2024 02:25
@ofborg ofborg bot added the 8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package label Jan 11, 2024
@ofborg ofborg bot requested review from 7c6f434c, thomasjm and wegank January 11, 2024 04:05
@ofborg ofborg bot added 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by a maintainer of all the package it changes. 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Linux. labels Jan 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@thomasjm thomasjm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this!

The one overall thing I notice is that there's getting to be a lot of duplication among all the 1.x.nix and 1.x-bin.nix files. For example, this PR marks the 6th time that the meta and maintainers list is duplicated. Maybe it's time soon to break common stuff into a common.nix file?

# Test requires network access
"Sockets"
] ++ lib.optionals (stdenv.isDarwin && stdenv.isx86_64) [
# Test Failed at $out/share/julia/stdlib/v1.8/LinearAlgebra/test/blas.jl:702
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This comment looks out of date as it references v1.8, does the test still fail?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have a Darwin machine to test, and it times out on ofborg.

@NickCao
Copy link
Member Author

NickCao commented Jan 11, 2024

Maybe it's time soon to break common stuff into a common.nix file?

Great, also a good time to drop the unmaintained versions.

@NickCao
Copy link
Member Author

NickCao commented Jan 11, 2024

Technically 1.9 is also EOL, but we can keep it for a little longer in case there are issues with 1.10.

@ofborg ofborg bot added the 8.has: clean-up This PR removes packages or removes other cruft label Jan 11, 2024
@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from thomasjm January 11, 2024 19:28
@ofborg ofborg bot added 10.rebuild-linux: 11-100 This PR causes between 11 and 100 packages to rebuild on Linux. and removed 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 This PR causes 1 package to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Linux. labels Jan 11, 2024
@NickCao
Copy link
Member Author

NickCao commented Jan 11, 2024

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 280153 run on x86_64-linux 1

6 packages built:
  • cantor
  • julia
  • julia-bin
  • julia_19
  • julia_19-bin
  • labplot

@thomasjm
Copy link
Contributor

The deduplication is looking great! I notice there's also a lot of similarity between 1.9-bin.nix and 1.10-bin.nix, and less so with 1.6-bin.nix. Any chance of giving them the same treatment? It's not essential I think, but would be nice to do at some point.

@NickCao
Copy link
Member Author

NickCao commented Jan 12, 2024

Done. I'd like to leave 1.6-bin.nix as is, we would get rid of it as soon as the next LTS is announced.

Copy link
Member

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me

@delroth delroth added 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages. labels Jan 12, 2024
@NickCao NickCao merged commit 0d6aa42 into NixOS:master Jan 12, 2024
@NickCao NickCao deleted the julia_110 branch January 12, 2024 15:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

8.has: clean-up This PR removes packages or removes other cruft 8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 This PR causes between 1 and 10 packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 11-100 This PR causes between 11 and 100 packages to rebuild on Linux. 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by a maintainer of all the package it changes. 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Update request: julia 1.9.4 → 1.10.0

4 participants