Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Last (?) rephrasings
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
doronbehar committed Aug 16, 2020
1 parent 0b259fa commit d75c73e
Showing 1 changed file with 38 additions and 38 deletions.
76 changes: 38 additions & 38 deletions rfcs/0075-declarative-wrappers.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -44,17 +44,16 @@ the environments to make the transition easier to review.

@rnhmjoj & @timokau How unfortunate it is that Python's `buildEnv` doesn't know
to do anything besides setting `NIX_PYTHONPATH` - it knows nothing about other
env vars, which is totally legitimate for dependencies of the environment to
rely upon runtime. Declarative wrappers don't care about the meaning of env
vars - all of them are treated equally, considering all of the inputs of a
derivation equally.
env vars, which some deps rely upon when eventually used. Declarative wrappers
don't care about the meaning of env vars - all of them are treated equally,
considering all of the inputs of a derivation equally.

- [pull 75851](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/75851)
- [issue 87667](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/87667)

Fixable with our current wrapping tools (I guess?) but it's unfortunate that we
have to trigger a rebuild of VLC and potentially increase it's closure size,
just because of a missing env var for some users. If only our wrapping
just because of a missing env var for only _some_ users. If only our wrapping
requirements were accessible via Nix attrsets, we could have instructed our
modules to consider this information when building the wrappers of the packages
in `environment.systemPackages`.
Expand All @@ -78,51 +77,52 @@ and

I guess we don't wrap HPLIP because not everybody want to use these binaries
and hence want these GUI deps in their closure (if they were wrapped with a
setup hook)? Declarative wrappers would allow some users to use the wrapped
binaries and others not need it, via an override or a NixOS config flag,
without triggering a rebuild of HPLIP itself.
setup hook)? Declarative wrappers would allow _some_ users to use the wrapped
binaries and others not to need this wrapping. Via an override or a NixOS
config flag, without triggering a rebuild of HPLIP itself, these users would be
easily satisfied.

## Orchestrating wrapping hooks

- [issue 78792](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/78792)

@worldofpeace you are correct. All of these setup-hooks are a mess, but at
least we have documented, yet not totally implemented this section of the
manual
@worldofpeace you are correct. All of these setup-hooks are a mess. At least we
have documented, (yet not totally implemented) this section of the manual
https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/#ssec-gnome-common-issues-double-wrapped

Declarative wrappers will deprecate the usage of our shell based hooks and will
wrap all executables automatically according to their needs, without requiring
the contributor a lot of knowledge of the wrapping system.
the contributor a lot of knowledge of the wrapping system. Also, double
wrappings will become a problem of the past.

- [issue 86369](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/86369)

@ttuegel I get the sense [you support this
idea](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/86369#issuecomment-626732191).
But for anyone else interested, the issue is a bit complex, so once you'll read
the design of this RFC, and see examples of what the POC implementation of
declarative wrappers [is capable
@ttuegel I get the sense [you support this idea of declarative
wrappers](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/86369#issuecomment-626732191).
For anyone else interested in a summary, the issue is a bit complex, so once
you'll read the design of this RFC, and see examples of what the POC
implementation of declarative wrappers [is capable
of](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/85103#issuecomment-614195666), I hope
you'll see how declarative wrappers can solve this issue.
you'll see how declarative wrappers will solve this issue.


## Issues _possibly_ fixable by declarative wrappers (?)

- [pull 61213](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/61213)

I'm not sure what's the issue there. But, I'm sure that a Nix based builder of
a Python environment should make it easier to control and alter if needed, what
environment is used even by builders, not only user facing Python environments.
I'm not sure what's the issue there. But, I'm sure that a declarative, Nix
based builder of a Python environment, even if this environment is used only
for a build, should make it easier to control and alter it's e.g `$PATH`.

- [issue 83667](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/83667)

@FRidh I see no reason for Python deps of Python packages to need to be in
`propagatedBuildInputs` and not regular `buildInputs`. I think this was done so
in the past so it'd be easy to know how to wrap them? Declarative wrappers
won't require runtime-env-requiring deps to be only in `propagatedBuildInputs`
or `buildInputs` - it should pick such deps from both lists. Hence, (I think) it
should be possible to make Python's static builds consistent with other
ecosystems.
`propagatedBuildInputs` and not regular `buildInputs` but please correct me if
I'm wrong. I think this was done so in the past so it'd be easy to know how to
wrap them? Declarative wrappers won't require runtime-env-requiring deps to be
only in `propagatedBuildInputs` or `buildInputs` - it should pick such deps
from both lists. Hence, (I think) it should be possible to make Python's static
builds consistent with other ecosystems.

- [issue 86054](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/86054)

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ $ nix why-depends -f. kdeconnect kdeframeworks.kconfigwidgets.dev
```

Also similar (but possibly fixable by moving `gobject-introspection` to a
different inputs list?
different inputs list?):

```
$ nix why-depends -f. beets gobject-introspection.dev
Expand All @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ $ nix why-depends -f. beets gobject-introspection.dev

- [issue 60260](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/60260)

General, justified complain about wrappers.
General, justified complaint about wrappers.

- [issue 95027](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/95027)
- [issue 23018](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/23018)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ interface similar to
[`wrapMpv`](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/a5985162e31587ae04ddc65c4e06146c2aff104c/pkgs/applications/video/mpv/wrapper.nix#L9-L23)
and
[`wrapNeovim`](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/a5985162e31587ae04ddc65c4e06146c2aff104c/pkgs/applications/editors/neovim/wrapper.nix#L11-L24)
which will accept a single derivation or an array of them and it'll wrap all of
which will accept a single derivation or an array of them and will wrap all of
their executables with the proper environment, based on their inputs.

`wrapGeneric` should iterate recursively all `buildInputs` and
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -319,9 +319,9 @@ Perhaps our shell hooks _can_ be fixed / improved, and we could help make it
easier to debug them via `NIX_DEBUG`. Then it might help us track down e.g why
environment variables are added twice etc. Still though, this wouldn't solve
half of the other issues presented here. Most importantly, the shell hooks rely
upon being in the inputs during build of the original derivation, hence mere
changes to an environment may trigger rebuilds that take a lot of time and
resources from avarage users. See [this
upon being in the inputs during build of the original derivation. Hence, mere
requests for changes to an environment a wrapper sets, trigger rebuilds that
take a lot of time and resources from average users. See [this
comment](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/88136#issuecomment-632674653).

# Unresolved questions
Expand All @@ -330,13 +330,13 @@ comment](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/88136#issuecomment-632674653).
The POC implementation does 1 thing which I'm most sure could be done better,
and that's iterating **recursively** all `buildInputs` and
`propagatedBuildInputs` of the given derivations. This is currently implemented
via a recursive (Nix) function, that's prone to reach a state of infinite
recursion. But this risk is currently mitigated using an array of packages we
know don't need any env vars at runtime, and for sure are very much at the
bottom of the list of very common inputs. This is implemented
with a recursive (Nix) function, prone to reach a state of infinite recursion.
This risk is currently mitigated using an array of packages we know don't need
any env vars at runtime, and for sure are very much at the bottom of the list
of all Nixpkgs' dependency graph. This part is implemented
[here](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/85103/files#diff-44c2102a355f50131eb8f69fb7e7c18bR75-R131).

There are other methods of doing this recursive search, but TBH I haven't yet
There are other methods of doing this recursive search, but I haven't yet
investigated all of them. For reference and hopefully for an advice, this need
was requested by others and discussed at:

Expand Down

0 comments on commit d75c73e

Please sign in to comment.