oraclejdk8: armv7l support

[elitak]

Motivation for this change

I wanted to run i2p on ARM, so this was needed.

Things done

Added the conditional branches to support armv7l hosts and did a little cleanup in hooks (will trigger rebuilds of oraclejdk on all archs).

Tested with 'services.i2p.enable = true;`. i2p seemed to work okay.

• Tested using sandboxing
  (nix.useSandbox on NixOS,
  or option build-use-sandbox in nix.conf
  on non-NixOS)
• Built on platform(s)
  • NixOS
  • macOS
  • Linux
• Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
• 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]

@elitak, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @edolstra, @taku0 and @vcunat to be potential reviewers.

[Mic92]

I got an evaluation error for this change:

error: while evaluating ‘oraclejdk8psu_distro’ at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:5666:38, called from /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:5642:19:      
while evaluating anonymous function at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:5668:60, called from /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:5668:5:                  
while evaluating ‘callPackageWith’ at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/lib/customisation.nix:113:35, called from /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix:5669:8:                              
while evaluating ‘makeOverridable’ at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/lib/customisation.nix:72:24, called from /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/lib/customisation.nix:117:8:                                          
while evaluating the file ‘/etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/development/compilers/oraclejdk/jdk8psu-linux.nix’:                                                                                                               
anonymous function at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/development/compilers/oraclejdk/jdk-linux-base.nix:1:1 called without required argument ‘sha256_armv7l’, at /etc/nixos/nixpkgs/.review/pr-27419-fze06kij/pkgs/development/compilers/oraclejdk/jdk8psu-linux.nix:1:1     

you might want to checkout the oraclejdk8psu_distro package.

[elitak]

Did you get that result by running something like NIX_PATH=nixpkgs=. nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip --against HEAD^"? I'm getting a different, unrelated error on package leksah.

[elitak]

Eh, well the fix seems obvious enough: I just added the missing arg to the only other place that calls that function. Whatever you ran should work this time, I think.

[Mic92]

I am not sure about this one. Is it a good idea to provided the closed variant only on a single platform, where other plattforms get openjdk? Is openjdk non-functional on ARM? If you want to have a shortcut to not having to compile jdk on your device, you can still use packageOverrides.

[elitak]

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/development/compilers/openjdk/bootstrap.nix#L32

Actually, there's no bootstrap for openjdk on ARM. I think oraclejdk is a sensible default until someone invests the time to get openjdk building on ARM. It won't install unless they have allowUnfree = true, anyway.

The dropbox-hosted bootstraps are a clear indicator of the sort of rabbit-hole I'm indisposed to explore, at the moment. If you really think having a nonfree dist as the default is worse than having no runtime at all for any java packages, then I can remove these lines, but I fail to see what the harm could be.

[elitak]

I don't specifically recall, but since I submitted this PR giving that as justification, chances are I did succeed in building i2p. I can't really check at the moment.

Is it broken for you or something?

[elitak]

I didn't touch any source or buildsteps, so maybe something has regressed? In any case, I have no insights to offer, sorry.