Skip to content

ghc: use available bootstrap binaries on aarch64-musl#451420

Closed
yuyuyureka wants to merge 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
yuyuyureka:ghc-aarch64-musl
Closed

ghc: use available bootstrap binaries on aarch64-musl#451420
yuyuyureka wants to merge 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
yuyuyureka:ghc-aarch64-musl

Conversation

@yuyuyureka
Copy link
Contributor

@yuyuyureka yuyuyureka commented Oct 12, 2025

Prior work: #395724

This is the same fallback to ghc-bin 9.8.x instead of ghc-bin 9.6.x (which isn't available for aarch64-musl) as bootPkgs, but when building 9.10.x.

Things done

  • Built on platform:
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Ran nixpkgs-review on this PR. See nixpkgs-review usage.
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files, usually in ./result/bin/.
  • Nixpkgs Release Notes
    • Package update: when the change is major or breaking.
  • NixOS Release Notes
    • Module addition: when adding a new NixOS module.
    • Module update: when the change is significant.
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md, pkgs/README.md, maintainers/README.md and other READMEs.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux. 6.topic: haskell General-purpose, statically typed, purely functional programming language labels Oct 12, 2025
Comment on lines +126 to +128
if stdenv.buildPlatform.isAarch64 && stdenv.buildPlatform.isMusl then
bb.packages.ghc984Binary
else if stdenv.buildPlatform.isDarwin then
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

According to my tests in #444249, this didn't work for 9.10.1.

In any case, #444249 includes this change, I think we should go forward with that instead.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fair. I built pkgsMusl.pandoc for testing, which seems to use 9.10.3.
I would argue that this would be handled correctly by marking 9.10.1 as broken when bootPkgs.ghc is 9.8.4.

I was not aware of #444249. It indeed seems nicer, however my lack of Haskell experience makes it difficult to judge how likely it is to get merged soon. I would like to restore the pkgsMusl.ghc build again, which was originally made possible in #395724.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The other PR is merged into staging. If you're OK with waiting for that, that should be enough. If you'd rather want to fix this on master in the meantime as well, we can do this PR as well.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can wait for staging :)

@yuyuyureka yuyuyureka closed this Oct 13, 2025
@yuyuyureka yuyuyureka deleted the ghc-aarch64-musl branch October 13, 2025 18:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

6.topic: haskell General-purpose, statically typed, purely functional programming language 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants