After the removal of the InputAccessor::fetchToStore() method, the
only remaining functionality in InputAccessor was `fingerprint` and
`getLastModified()`, and there is no reason to keep those in a
separate class.
Fix formatting violations, update blacklist to reflect moved files.
PR #10556 passed CI before the new formating rules were added, and our
CI has the race condition of allowing old results, resulting in master
getting broken.
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>
