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

handbrake: 1.3.1 -> 1.3.2 #86857

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 18, 2020
Merged

handbrake: 1.3.1 -> 1.3.2 #86857

merged 1 commit into from May 18, 2020

Conversation

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor

Anton-Latukha commented May 4, 2020

Motivation for this change

Starting to use GitHub CDN.
Every time there is any HandBrake release - it gets published on their website after a timeout of arbitrary days. And I want to be able to respond to notifications of release right away, and not postpone, stagger, keep checking wait website tarball and remember that I still need to update.

Also update to 1.3.2.

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.
@peterhoeg
Copy link
Member

peterhoeg commented May 5, 2020

What happens when you build from the checkout as opposed to the release tarball?

@peterhoeg
Copy link
Member

peterhoeg commented May 5, 2020

and add autoreconfHook to nativeBuildInputs.

@doronbehar
Copy link
Contributor

doronbehar commented May 5, 2020

Also, some parts of the preConfigure are not needed since:

HandBrake/HandBrake#2690

HandBrake/HandBrake#2712

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 5, 2020

@peterhoeg:

and add autoreconfHook to nativeBuildInputs.

Results:

source root is HandBrake-1.3.2
setting SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH to timestamp 1588534233 of file HandBrake-1.3.2/version.txt
patching sources
autoreconfPhase
autoreconf: 'configure.ac' or 'configure.in' is required
builder for '/nix/store/dvg6dlm5pwrxq8pfbljjqjfky6v5hsra-handbrake-1.3.2.drv' failed with exit code 1
@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 5, 2020

@peterhoeg:

What happens when you build from the checkout as opposed to the release tarball?

Git checkout

I was discussing this issue with them upstream a couple of years ago. They have invented their-own versioning inside a project:

nix-shell . -A handbrake
unpackPhase
cd source
patchPhase
scripts/repo-info.sh    # source: https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/blob/8e2a08267705f09e92f06289820ad6ebbfc9040e/scripts/repo-info.sh

Output:

URL=
HASH=ccb2e7234e01a2a07f537512045f7511583deaf9
SHORTHASH=ccb2e7234e0
REV=224188
BRANCH=handbrake-1.3.2
REMOTE=
DATE=2020-05-05 12:44:02 +0300

And this returned information results into probe: repo info...(fail) code 1

Results in build log:

source root is source
patching sources
configuring
...
probe: repo info...(fail) code 1
probe: version.txt...(fail)
ERROR: HandBrake is missing version information it needs to build properly.
Clone the official git repository at https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake.git
or download an official source archive from https://handbrake.fr
; configure stop.
compute: project data...
builder for '/nix/store/vwispj413x66pgh419awlgd6z9vj3nnv-handbrake-1.3.2.drv' failed with exit code 1

I got no description on what this situation is about, threads I've participated in or read resolve things replying "use website tarball".

Tarball package

Running same script in itL

scripts/repo-info.sh

Also results into probe: repo info...(fail) code 1, but now of the other kind

fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
Not a valid repository.

And that situation "works" in the tarball:

probe: repo info...(fail) code 1
probe: version.txt...(pass)
...

If to give the long answer.

As I understand that there does not exist the case to succesfully go there proselytize and rip-out their internal distribution & versioning - I do not worry about this too much.

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 5, 2020

Also, some parts of the preConfigure are not needed since:

HandBrake/HandBrake#2690

HandBrake/HandBrake#2712

@doronbehar

Reduced the patches.

@Anton-Latukha Anton-Latukha force-pushed the Anton-Latukha:handbrake-1.3.2 branch from fefb410 to f9a7d6c May 5, 2020
@doronbehar
Copy link
Contributor

doronbehar commented May 5, 2020

BTW, I'm getting this when running it:

** Message: 14:08:09.629: Couldn't initialize gstreamer. Disabling live preview.

I think you can fix it with something similar to:

https://github.com/Anton-Latukha/nixpkgs/blob/f9a7d6c4ed32bb78d0df7d25dd1a3b72f658dbe4/pkgs/applications/audio/transcribe/default.nix#L46-L47

While some gst-plugins are located in the build inputs so wrapGAppsHook will pick them up.

But it's also possible that gappsWrapperArgs+=( is not needed...

M  pkgs/applications/video/handbrake/default.nix
@Anton-Latukha Anton-Latukha force-pushed the Anton-Latukha:handbrake-1.3.2 branch from f9a7d6c to 17125fd May 5, 2020
@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 5, 2020

BTW, I'm getting this when running it:

** Message: 14:08:09.629: Couldn't initialize gstreamer. Disabling live preview.

@doronbehar

I specifically tested that live preview works.

And with https://github.com/Anton-Latukha/nixpkgs/blob/f9a7d6c4ed32bb78d0df7d25dd1a3b72f658dbe4/pkgs/applications/audio/transcribe/default.nix#L46-L47 ghb still throws that same warning. And just as before - in ghb preview still works despite of that warning.

@doronbehar
Copy link
Contributor

doronbehar commented May 5, 2020

@doronbehar
I specifically tested that live preview works.
And with https://github.com/Anton-Latukha/nixpkgs/blob/f9a7d6c4ed32bb78d0df7d25dd1a3b72f658dbe4/pkgs/applications/audio/transcribe/default.nix#L46-L47 ghb still throws that same warning. And just as before - in ghb live preview still works despite of that warning.

OK I guess then it's not that bad (I'm not using Handbrake actively, I only tested it once in the past). If someone will notice some missing functionality that may be related to this message, he'll put the effort to debug this.

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 5, 2020

@doronbehar

It makes in Preview the Live Preview button appear.
Now I remember, it encodes some seconds of video and then allows to play/watch it in the internal player window.
Like here: https://handbrake.fr/docs/en/latest/workflow/preview-settings.html

I also do not use HandBrake mutch these days, Preview is needed, I almost never run Live Preview, run the encoding for some %s, and then looked at that sample.

Wrapper configuration of GST_PLUGIN_SYSTEM_PATH is not successful in enabling feature.
I may dig into it, make a deeper assessment, maybe look how they --prefix LD_LIBRARY_PATH : "${libPath}" and assemble its libPath variable.

Thank you.

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 17, 2020

I do not understand why if one maintainer changes to the package, and already went through the review process - why other same-level maintained should "mandatory" review it.

The Mertens for example probably or too busy or do not care for it long time ago.

The review is done.

@doronbehar
Copy link
Contributor

doronbehar commented May 18, 2020

Yea this is how things are in this repo unfortunately. Sometimes a maintainer with a merge bit goes through the reviewed pulls sorted from old to new and they may encounter this PR at some point, but don't hold your breath for this to happen.

@wmertens
Copy link
Contributor

wmertens commented May 18, 2020

Sorry, I missed that it was ok to merge. Indeed, I don't use handbrake any more, so feel free to sign yourself as a maintainer

@wmertens wmertens merged commit 548872b into NixOS:master May 18, 2020
16 checks passed
16 checks passed
Evaluation Performance Report Evaluator Performance Report
Details
grahamcofborg-eval ^.^!
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-check-maintainers matching changed paths to changed attrs...
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-check-meta config.nix: checkMeta = true
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-darwin nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./pkgs/t
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-lib-tests nix-build --arg pkgs import ./. {} ./lib/tests/release.nix
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./nixos/
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos-manual nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./nixos/
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos-options nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./nixos/
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-manual nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./pkgs/t
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-tarball nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./pkgs/t
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-unstable-jobset nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="17125fd"; rev="17125fd235005ddd0713754a656d89c75b09bf3e"; } ./pkgs/t
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-package-list nix-env -qa --json --file .
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-package-list-no-aliases nix-env -qa --json --file . --arg config { allowAliases = false; }
Details
handbrake, handbrake.passthru.tests on aarch64-linux Success
Details
handbrake, handbrake.passthru.tests on x86_64-linux Success
Details
@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 18, 2020

@wmertens I am also a maintainer of this package for 2-3 years already.

We chatted with you back in the day about the package.

I am talking that I am a maintainer, process requires review from the higher-order maintainer, like doronbehar.

But I am maintainer that passes review.
I am just puzzled why "process" requires review from same-level package maintainers.

People tend to not remove themself from maintainer fields and not care and not show up.
And so - there are packages that have 5-6 "maintainers" but no one shows up to maintain it. So why that package should have all 5-6 maintainers sign-off between each other every time? It is not like this is Linux Kernel development, and as I know they do multistage reviews, but do not require such multicross peer review signoff all the time, because nothing would get done then.

@Anton-Latukha
Copy link
Contributor Author

Anton-Latukha commented May 18, 2020

@doronbehar

Thanks to you a lot. You are a great guy.

How is auto update bot there.

I see that it still not pipelined to autotrack and automerge

Why? It seems really strange.

I think most people, and you, would've preferred for minor updates to go without bothering them.

@doronbehar
Copy link
Contributor

doronbehar commented May 19, 2020

Thanks to you a lot. You are a great guy.

💚

It is not like this is Linux Kernel development, and as I know they do multistage reviews, but do not require such multicross peer review signoff all the time, because nothing would get done then.

How is auto update bot there.
I see that it still not pipelined to autotrack and automerge
Why? It seems really strange.
I think most people, and you, would've preferred for minor updates to go without bothering them.

Your phrasing is not that good but I think I understand you. See:

@peterhoeg peterhoeg mentioned this pull request May 19, 2020
5 of 10 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
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.