[Nix-dev] Including "beta" or "unstable" identifiers in package names?

[Shea Levy]

Hi Stewart,

'shortVersion' is an argument to rustc.nix, but it's not how nix parses
the version. nix looks at the name argument (which, looking at
rustc.nix, is set to "rustc-${version}", with version set to if
isRelease then shortVersion else "${shortVersion}-g${builtins.substring
0 7 srcRev}") and parses out the version from there. The version parsing
code is here:
https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/1.11.3/src/libexpr/names.cc#L14-L30 ,
in summary the version is everything following the first dash that isn't
followed by a letter. So if the name ends up as rustc-beta-2016-08-17,
nix parses "rustc-beta" as the name and "2016-08-17" as the version.

Thanks,
Shea

stewart mackenzie <setori88 at gmail.com> writes:

> Trying to understand your email:
>
> in development/compilers/rust
>
> beta.nix:
> current behaviour: the name "beta" is already part of the version ->
> see "shortVersion"
> "...
>   rustc = callPackage ./rustc.nix {
>     shortVersion = "beta-2016-08-17";
> ..."
> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/development/compilers/rust/beta.nix#L5-L6
>
> in head.nix
> current behaviour: the name "master" is already part of the version ->
> see "shortVersion"
> "...
>   rustc = callPackage ./rustc.nix {
>     shortVersion = "master-1.13.0";
> ..."
>
> https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/development/compilers/rust/head.nix#L5-L6
>
> I don't understand: "IMO the 'beta' and 'master' is part of the
> version, not the package name, and so if it exists at all it should be
> part of the version string;" as it quite clearly is part of the "shortVersion"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20160830/95c8654e/attachment.sig>