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

replace SRI hashes (20.03) #89490

wants to merge 2 commits into from


Copy link

@LnL7 LnL7 commented Jun 4, 2020

Motivation for this change

These break compatibility with nix 2.0, see #89275. Unless we also want to backport #89476 to the 20.03 release.

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
vcunat approved these changes Jun 7, 2020
Copy link

@vcunat vcunat left a comment

For 20.03 (and older) I really prefer this instead of the requirement bump.

bhipple approved these changes Jun 9, 2020
Copy link

@worldofpeace worldofpeace commented Jun 18, 2020

@LnL7 Rebase? This LGTM.

@LnL7 LnL7 force-pushed the replace-sri-hashes branch from 18773e2 to cf3dc63 Jun 18, 2020
Copy link

@bhipple bhipple commented Oct 30, 2020

Has merge conflict and 20.03 is no longer maintained, so I'll close. Feel free to re-open if you still want to do this of course.

@bhipple bhipple closed this Oct 30, 2020
Copy link

@worldofpeace worldofpeace commented Oct 31, 2020

20.03 is still maintained #101975 and accepting fixes. I hope people don't close PRs thinking this, though, for this particular one it was good to close regardless.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants