Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

container: Block until destroy is complete. Fixes #809 #810

wants to merge 1 commit into from


Copy link

@nh2 nh2 commented Dec 10, 2017

Fix for #809, see commit message and added comments

Copy link

@domenkozar domenkozar commented Dec 11, 2017

@edolstra is there a better way?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nh2 nh2 commented Dec 23, 2017

is there a better way?

@domenkozar This possibly: NixOS/nixpkgs#32992

Copy link

@johbo johbo commented Dec 28, 2017

@nh2 seems that we are chasing the same problems 😄

I got inspired by your patch, ended up with a different code though. Found that both destroy() and stop() should wait until the operation is done. Interestingly the virualbox backend also has very similar code which waits until the state changes.

Here is my suggestion, it's based on existing code fragments which I found in the end of the file johbo/nixops@0a5d91a...johbo:work-johbo

@johbo johbo mentioned this pull request Dec 28, 2017
Copy link

@johbo johbo commented Dec 28, 2017

Noticed that comments are only possible in real PRs, created #825 for convenience.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nh2 nh2 commented Dec 29, 2017

@johbo My patch here was intended mainly as a workaround unles/until it gets fixed in nixos-container itself in NixOS/nixpkgs#32992. Then nixops wouldn't need to have any of this logic.

Copy link

@grahamc grahamc commented Mar 26, 2020


Thank you for this PR.

In the past several months, some major changes have taken place in

  1. Backends have been removed, preferring a plugin-based architecture.
    Here are some of them:

  2. NixOps Core has been updated to be Python 3 only, and at the
    same time, MyPy type hints have been added and are now strictly
    required during CI.

This is all accumulating in to what I hope will be a NixOps 2.0
. There is a tracking issue for that:
#1242 . It is possible that
more core changes will be made to NixOps for this release, with a
focus on simplifying NixOps core and making it easier to use and work

My hope is that by adding types and more thorough automated testing,
it will be easier for contributors to make improvements, and for
contributions like this one to merge in the future.

However, because of the major changes, it has become likely that this
PR cannot merge right now as it is. The backlog of now-unmergable PRs
makes it hard to see which ones are being kept up to date.

If you would like to see this merge, please bring it up to date with
master and reopen it
. If the or mypy type checking fails, please
correct any issues and then reopen it. I will be looking primarily at
open PRs whose tests are all green.

Thank you again for the work you've done here, I am sorry to be
closing it now.


@grahamc grahamc closed this Mar 26, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.