Unify nix wrappers #2355
Open
Unify nix wrappers #2355
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mazunki
force-pushed
the
ref-nix-files
branch
2 times, most recently
from
871f9c6 to
26a90d1
Compare
no reason to implement hooks in multiple places
mazunki
force-pushed
the
ref-nix-files
branch
from
26a90d1 to
53815e7
Compare
Contributor
|
I don't know enough about nix to give any meaningful input here - I hope @MagnusS does. But can you describe exactly what is different if we merge this? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Starting the refactor by making standalone targets for
ccacheand our warning suppressor.This makes our current nix targets cleaner, reduces repeated implementations, and should make it easier to disable them at a single location.
Followup-question: is there a particular motivation for having multiple
stdenvorpkgsversions for different things? If this is not necessary, I would like to refactor how we name and pass these inputs around: Currently we're redefininingpkgs ? import nixpkgs { }in four different places. This feels wrong.