| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Change-Id: I9fbd55a9d50464a56fe11cb42a06a206914150d8
|
|
Hopefully they make the code easier to understand!
|
|
`EvalState::mkSingleDerivedPathString` previously contained its own
inverse (printing, rather than parsing) in order to validate what was
parsed. Now that is pulled out into its own separate function:
`EvalState::coerceToSingleDerivedPath`.
In additional that pulled out logic is deduplicated with
`EvalState::mkOutputString` via `EvalState::mkOutputStringRaw`, which is
itself deduplicated (and generalized) with
`DownstreamPlaceholder::mkOutputStringRaw`.
All these changes make the unit tests simpler.
(We would ideally write more unit tests for `mkSingleDerivedPathString`
`coerceToSingleDerivedPath` directly, but we cannot yet do that because
the IO in reading the store path won't work when the dummy store cannot
hold anything. Someday we'll have a proper in-memory store which will
work for this.)
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
We want to be able to write down `foo.drv^bar.drv^baz`:
`foo.drv^bar.drv` is the dynamic derivation (since it is itself a
derivation output, `bar.drv` from `foo.drv`).
To that end, we create `Single{Derivation,BuiltPath}` types, that are
very similar except instead of having multiple outputs (in a set or
map), they have a single one. This is for everything to the left of the
rightmost `^`.
`NixStringContextElem` has an analogous change, and now can reuse
`SingleDerivedPath` at the top level. In fact, if we ever get rid of
`DrvDeep`, `NixStringContextElem` could be replaced with
`SingleDerivedPath` entirely!
Important note: some JSON formats have changed.
We already can *produce* dynamic derivations, but we can't refer to them
directly. Today, we can merely express building or example at the top
imperatively over time by building `foo.drv^bar.drv`, and then with a
second nix invocation doing `<result-from-first>^baz`, but this is not
declarative. The ethos of Nix of being able to write down the full plan
everything you want to do, and then execute than plan with a single
command, and for that we need the new inductive form of these types.
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Valentin Gagarin <valentin.gagarin@tweag.io>
|
|
This is a part of CA derivations that we forgot to put behind the
experimental feature.
This was caught by @fricklerhandwerk in
https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/8369#discussion_r1258133719
|
|
This gets us ready for dynamic derivation dependencies (part of RFC 92).
|
