grafx2: 2.4 -> 2.6

[bb010g]

Motivation for this change

Upgrading Grafx2 to an actively maintained release, as well as ensuring at least one distribution actually attempts truer source builds of dependencies like recoil.

Things done

• Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
• 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 nox --run "nox-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): adds 421.7kb
• Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Upgrades Grafx2 from 2.4 to 2.6, introduces its dependency RECOIL at 4.3.1, and introduces RECOIL's dependency cito at the latest release 0.4 and the latest Git revision 8cd935e.

As I was implementing grafx2's postFetch hook to insert a revision version file normally included from tarballs, I noticed that fetchFromGitHub is inconsistent in how postFetch works due to using either fetchzip (uses postFetch, so user extends on extraPostFetch) or fetchgit (extends on postFetch). The first commit standardizes postFetch over forge fetchers and updates all usages in Nixpkgs as needed.

[veprbl]

Can you please split this into two PR's? Also for fetchFrom change, I think, you need to explain much more about what you are trying to achieve here. The big diff doesn't help with ease of review, splitting into smaller commits should help. Some other questions: is this change backward compatible? What steps did you already take to check that this doesn't break anything?

[risicle]

Hmm this builds for me on non-nixos linux x86_64 but grafx2 segfaults for me just after it spawns a window:

#0  0x00007ffff79505e7 in __memcpy_ssse3 () from /nix/store/681354n3k44r8z90m35hm8945vsp95h1-glibc-2.27/lib/libc.so.6
#1  0x0000000000418b9c in GFX2_UpdateRect ()
#2  0x0000000000418f97 in Flush_update ()
#3  0x00000000004769eb in Get_input ()
#4  0x000000000044b176 in Window_clicked_button ()
#5  0x000000000046c740 in Verbose_message ()
#6  0x0000000000407705 in Init_program ()
#7  0x0000000000407f96 in main ()

[veprbl]

@bb010g Are you still interested in finishing this?

[miniupnp]

grafx2 2.7 is out ! ;)

[bb010g]

Sorry about the delay. Currently reworking this with better style. First commit (cito) is up at bb010g/nixpkgs@14eb843 (on the bb010g:grafx2-2.6-neo branch), and I'll get rid of that branch once Grafx2 is actually included again.

There's a strange stripping/dotnet/.NET Core interaction detailed in cito/unstable.nix if anyone wants to figure that out.

[stale]

Hello, I'm a bot and I thank you in the name of the community for your contributions.

Nixpkgs is a busy repository, and unfortunately sometimes PRs get left behind for too long. Nevertheless, we'd like to help committers reach the PRs that are still important. This PR has had no activity for 180 days, and so I marked it as stale, but you can rest assured it will never be closed by a non-human.

If this is still important to you and you'd like to remove the stale label, we ask that you leave a comment. Your comment can be as simple as "still important to me". But there's a bit more you can do:

If you received an approval by an unprivileged maintainer and you are just waiting for a merge, you can @ mention someone with merge permissions and ask them to help. You might be able to find someone relevant by using Git blame on the relevant files, or via GitHub's web interface. You can see if someone's a member of the nixpkgs-committers team, by hovering with the mouse over their username on the web interface, or by searching them directly on the list.

If your PR wasn't reviewed at all, it might help to find someone who's perhaps a user of the package or module you are changing, or alternatively, ask once more for a review by the maintainer of the package/module this is about. If you don't know any, you can use Git blame on the relevant files, or GitHub's web interface to find someone who touched the relevant files in the past.

If your PR has had reviews and nevertheless got stale, make sure you've responded to all of the reviewer's requests / questions. Usually when PR authors show responsibility and dedication, reviewers (privileged or not) show dedication as well. If you've pushed a change, it's possible the reviewer wasn't notified about your push via email, so you can always officially request them for a review, or just @ mention them and say you've addressed their comments.

Lastly, you can always ask for help at our Discourse Forum, or more specifically, at this thread or at #nixos' IRC channel.

[miniupnp]

@bb010g what's the status ?

[stale]

I marked this as stale due to inactivity. → More info

[rapenne-s]

Could you rebase your work on a recent commit and focus on upgrading grafx2 first?

aed0528 should not be mixed with updating grafx2

[AndersonTorres]

Closing as dead.