Otherwise without the change the test fails on nix-2.26 as:
error: derivation contains an illegal reference specifier 'dev'
Note: the error message does not match intended change.
(cherry picked from commit 1e7c7244cf)
Otherwise without the change the test fails on nix-2.26 as:
error: derivation contains an illegal reference specifier 'dev'
Note: the error message does not match intended change.
Default: istty(stdout)
This refactors `nix develop` internals a bit to use the `json` type
more. The assertion now operates in the in-memory json instead of
re-parsing it. While this is technically a weaker guarantee, we
should be able to rely on the library to get this right. It's its
most essential purpose.
The bug reappeared after all, and the fix introduced a different bug. I
just reverted on 2.27 first, in #12576, but upon further introspection
and discussion with @roberth, with preparing for and travelling to
Planet Nix I will not be able to fix it on `master` soon enough for a
revert to not be warranted here in the meantime also.
This reverts commit c98525235f.
The bug reappeared after all, and the fix introduced a different bug. We
want to release 2.27 imminently so there is no time to do a proper fix,
which appears to require a larger reworking. Hopefully we will have it
for 2.28, however.
This reverts commit c98525235f.
E.g. in a derivation attribute `foo = ./bar`, if ./bar is a symlink,
we should copy the symlink to the store, not its target. This restores
the behaviour of Nix <= 2.19.
(cherry picked from commit 26b87e78b5)
E.g. in a derivation attribute `foo = ./bar`, if ./bar is a symlink,
we should copy the symlink to the store, not its target. This restores
the behaviour of Nix <= 2.19.
These don't need to evaluate anything (except for the flake metadata
in flake.nix) so we can make these commands operate on lazy trees
without risk of any semantic change in the evaluator.
However, `nix flake metadata` now no longer prints the store path,
which is a breaking change (but unavoidable if we want lazy trees).
This seems to be the way to do it now, even though I can't run them
without setting at least one env var.
I'll only fix shellcheck for now. Don't shoot the messenger.
It isn't quite clear to me why the previous commit masked this problem,
but I'm glad shellcheck has an effect or more effect now.
"content-address*ed*" derivation is misleading because all derivations
are *themselves* content-addressed. What may or may not be
content-addressed is not derivation itself, but the *output* of the
derivation.
The outputs are not *part* of the derivation (for then the derivation
wouldn't be complete before we built it) but rather separate entities
produced by the derivation.
"content-adddress*ed*" is not correctly because it can only describe
what the derivation *is*, and that is not what we are trying to do.
"content-address*ing*" is correct because it describes what the
derivation *does* --- it produces content-addressed data.
This seems to be the way to do it now, even though I can't run them
without setting at least one env var.
I'll only fix shellcheck for now. Don't shoot the messenger.
It isn't quite clear to me why the previous commit masked this problem,
but I'm glad shellcheck has an effect or more effect now.
