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

vala: unify builders for various versions #19484

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 12, 2016
Merged

Conversation

peterhoeg
Copy link
Member

Motivation for this change

We are currently carrying a number of vala versions where each version is essentially just a copy of the earlier version.

This PR gets rid of a ton of duplication and uses a standard builder.

Secondly, we add a definition for the latest vala 0.34.1.

Lastly, we add a generic "vala" that refers to the latest stable version.

I have tried changing the definitions for "simple-scan" and "valum" to use the latest vala version and they at least compile OK so I'll try a massive sed job to replace all the definitions later to simply use the latest version through "vala" instead of specifying a version directly.

According to upstream:

"Well-maintained packages are expected to always build with the latest stable Vala version."

Maybe this means that my generic builder is then no longer necessary. Oh well...

I added myself to the maintainer array for vala although I have no interest in the language - this was purely a nix exercise for me but I thought it was reasonable to be the one to clean up the mess if this has side effects...

Cc: @antono and @lethalman

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing
    (nix.useSandbox on NixOS,
    or option build-use-sandbox in nix.conf
    on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • OS X
    • Linux
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@mention-bot
Copy link

@peterhoeg, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @lethalman, @DamienCassou and @urkud to be potential reviewers.

We are currently carrying a number of vala versions where each version
is essentially just a copy of the earlier version.

This PR gets rid of a ton of duplication and uses a standard builder.

Secondly, we add a definition for the latest vala 0.34.1.

Lastly, we add a generic "vala" that refers to the latest stable
version.

I have tried changing the definitions for "simple-scan" and "valum" to use
the latest vala version and they at least compile OK so I'll try a
massive sed job to replace all the definitions later to simply use the
latest version through "vala" instead of specifying a version directly.

According to upstream:

"Well-maintained packages are expected to always build with the latest
stable Vala version."

Maybe this means that my generic builder is then no longer necessary. Oh well...

I added myself to the maintainer array for vala although I have no
interest in the language - this was purely a nix exercise for me but I
thought it was reasonable to be the one to clean up the mess if this has
side effects...

Cc: @antono and @lethalman
Copy link
Member

@NeQuissimus NeQuissimus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So much nicer :D

Only one question: Do we need all these individual versions?

@peterhoeg
Copy link
Member Author

As I put it in the commit message:

"Well-maintained packages are expected to always build with the latest stable Vala version."

Maybe this means that my generic builder is then no longer necessary. Oh well...

The next step will be a mass replace and then see what breaks...

@NeQuissimus
Copy link
Member

My bad, I did not read the full commit message

@NeQuissimus NeQuissimus merged commit 259dcac into NixOS:master Oct 12, 2016
@peterhoeg peterhoeg deleted the vala branch October 12, 2016 13:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants