-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
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
nixpkgs_local_repository dependency change doesn't invalidate nixpkgs_package #113
Comments
Thanks for reporting this! The following should work correctly, i.e. adding
As you describe, it looks like right now |
Just to clarify, what I meant with the I'm not sure creating more symlinks in |
Oh, it is indeed. Sorry, I overlooked that.
I see, and |
@jcpetruzza still working on this? |
Sorry, I haven't had the time to work on this yet. If someone wants to look into it, by all means, go ahead! 🙂 |
Nix files of a nixpkgs_local_repository are not tracked by the nixpkgs_package rule. In this commit, we generate the list of these files in the nixpkgs_local_repository and make the nixpkgs_package rule reading this list to add all of these files in its own repository to let Bazel track them. The list of files is propagated from a rule to the other one throught a file named `nix-file-deps` created in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` repository. Closes #113
Additional Nix files of a `nixpkgs_local_repository` are not tracked by the `nixpkgs_package` rule. In this commit, we generate the list of these files in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` rule and make the `nixpkgs_package` rule reading this list to add all of these files in its own repository to let Bazel track them. The list of files is propagated from one rule to the other one throught a file named `nix-file-deps` created in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` repository. Closes #113
Additional Nix files of a `nixpkgs_local_repository` are not tracked by the `nixpkgs_package` rule. In this commit, we generate the list of these files in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` rule and make the `nixpkgs_package` rule reading this list to add all of these files in its own repository to let Bazel track them. The list of files is propagated from one rule to the other one throught a file named `nix-file-deps` created in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` repository. Closes #113
Additional Nix files of a `nixpkgs_local_repository` are not tracked by the `nixpkgs_package` rule. In this commit, we generate the list of these files in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` rule and make the `nixpkgs_package` rule reading this list to add all of these files in its own repository to let Bazel track them. The list of files is propagated from one rule to the other one throught a file named `nix-file-deps` created in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` repository. Closes #113
Additional Nix files of a `nixpkgs_local_repository` are not tracked by the `nixpkgs_package` rule. In this commit, we generate the list of these files in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` rule and make the `nixpkgs_package` rule reading this list to add all of these files in its own repository to let Bazel track them. The list of files is propagated from one rule to the other one throught a file named `nix-file-deps` created in the `nixpkgs_local_repository` repository. Closes #113
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace take into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
This test runs Bazel in the Bazel sandbox to ensure some dependencies are well tracked at the workspace level. So, we create a workspace, build it, then change the content of some workspace files and check if a rebuild of this workspace takes into account these changes. This is a regression test for the issue #113.
Given a
WORKSPACE
with something like this:I'd expect that changes to
my/nixpkgs/something.nix
will force@foo
to be rebuilt, but it seems that it doesn't and only changes tomy/nixpkgs/default.nix
will do. We had some reproducibility issues because of this, our workaround was to merge everything in one big file and avoidnix_file_deps
.From looking quickly through the code, the label
"@nixpkgs"
corresponds to@nixpkgs//:nixpkgs
and this is symlinked tomy/nixpkgs/default.nix
, so iiuc, from the point of view ofbazel
,@foo
only depends on that file, and not onmy/nixpkgs/something.nix
. I guess@nixpkgs//:nixpkgs
could instead be defined to be afilegroup()
containing the givennix_file
and everything innix_file_deps
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: