utillinux: rename to util-linux

[grahamc]

Motivation for this change

Having the pname not match the attribute name in this case, when the pname is the project's actual name causes me quite a lot of headache.

Things done

• Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
• Built on platform(s)
  • NixOS
  • macOS
  • other Linux distributions
• 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 nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
• Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
• Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[makefu]

Can confirm, i fell over a trace when upgrading to 20.09 which stated i should use util-linux package instead

[grahamc]

I'm not sure this large patch should cleanup whitespace for the files which are already messy. Opinions?

[SuperSandro2000]

I'm not sure this large patch should cleanup whitespace for the files which are already messy. Opinions?

If we keep the changes to minimum we maybe can skip staging and go straight to master. With whitespace fixes we could cause a lot of rebuilds if they are in the wrong places.

[FRidh]

👍

[vikanezrimaya]

I love this. utillinux made me stumble first time I explicitly requested the package somewhere in my configuration, because I totally expected it to be util-linux, since dashes were always OK in attribute sets (unlike e.g. Python or JS where you could get in trouble with that kind of syntax)

[7c6f434c]

since dashes were always OK in attribute sets

Naturally, util-linux is one of those packages that is older than support for dashes in attribute names in Nix.

[grahamc]

Just pushed a fixup addressing:

getting status of '/var/lib/ofborg/checkout/repo/38dca4e3aa6bca43ea96d2fcc04e8229/mr-est/packet-spot-eval-4/pkgs/os-specific/linux/pam_mount/insert_util-linux_path_hooks.patch': No such file or directory

[jonringer]

looks like rebuilds are from changing comments inside of code blocks

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/104776
2 packages blacklisted:
tests.nixos-functions.nixos-test tests.nixos-functions.nixosTest-test

4 packages built:
lxcfs unixtools.util-linux util-linux util-linuxMinimal

[roberth]

💯

[grahamc]

alleyoop

[ElvishJerricco]

Hm. Wish this would have included aliases for the other utillinux variants e.g. utillinuxMinimal.

[grahamc]

There is still time to rename those 😃

…

On Fri, Jan 8, 2021, at 7:29 PM, Will Fancher wrote: Hm. Wish this would have included aliases for the other utillinux variants e.g. utillinuxMinimal. — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#104776 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAASXLHAVUB447C2OEESU23SY6PNVANCNFSM4UBBHO2A>.