This missing GC root wasn't much of a problem before, because the
heap would end up with a reference to the `baseEnv` pretty soon,
but when unit testing, the construction of `EvalState` doesn't
necessarily happen well before GC runs for the first time.
Found while unit testing the Rust bindings that currently reside
at https://github.com/nixops4/nixops4/tree/main/rust
When trying the „nix-store info“ commands on this page I received the error "error: 'info' is not a recognised command". According to https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/9349 info seems to have been an alias for ping. So why not just replace info with ping?
Having a narHash doesn't mean that we have the other attributes
returned by the fetcher (such as lastModified or rev). For instance,
$ nix flake metadata github:NixOS/patchelf/7c2f768bf9601268a4e71c2ebe91e2011918a70f
Last modified: 2024-01-15 10:51:22
but
$ nix flake metadata github:NixOS/patchelf/7c2f768bf9601268a4e71c2ebe91e2011918a70f?narHash=sha256-PPXqKY2hJng4DBVE0I4xshv/vGLUskL7jl53roB8UdU%3D
(does not print a "Last modified")
The latter only happens if the store path already exists or is
substitutable, which made this impure behaviour unpredictable.
Fixes#10601.
This makes it match the current pattern:
- `package.nix` assumes deps are right version
- Overlay in `flake.nix` creates `*-nix` package variations
- Overlay manually passes in those packages to `package.nix`
* move single-user uninstall to the end
this is not the default method of installation, and therefore irrelevant
for most users.
* move the backup restore instructions to the first step
for most users we can expect that the system-wide shell init files were
not ever touched, so we can as well tell them to do the most likely
thing.
from experience, while it's not necessarily safe to just mess with these
files, most people are simply confused by the complexity of
instructions.
* provide more detailed instructions for using `sudo vifs`
we can expect most beginners not to ever have used `vi`, and they will
probably need some hand-holding.
* express instructions as a script
Co-authored-by: wamirez <wamirez@protonmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
Closes#10585
As it turns out, libseccomp maintains an internal syscall table and
validates each rule against it. This means that when using libseccomp
2.5.4 or older, one may pass `452` as syscall number against it, but
since it doesn't exist in the internal structure, `libseccomp` will refuse
to create a filter for that. This happens with nixpkgs-23.11, i.e. on
stable NixOS and when building Nix against the project's flake.
To work around that
* a backport of libseccomp 2.5.5 on upstream nixpkgs has been
scheduled[1].
* the package now uses libseccomp 2.5.5 on its own already. This is to
provide a quick fix since the correct fix for 23.11 is still a staging cycle
away.
It must not be possible to build a Nix with an incompatible libseccomp
version (nothing can be built in a sandbox on Linux!), so configure.ac
rejects libseccomp if `__SNR_fchmodat2` is not defined.
We still need the compat header though since `SCMP_SYS(fchmodat2)`
internally transforms this into `__SNR_fchmodat2` which points to
`__NR_fchmodat2` from glibc 2.39, so it wouldn't build on glibc 2.38.
The updated syscall table from libseccomp 2.5.5 is NOT used for that
step, but used later, so we need both, our compat header and their
syscall table 🤷
[1] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/306070
