This causes 'nix' to print build log output to stderr rather than
showing the last log line in the progress bar. Log lines are prefixed
by the name of the derivation (minus the version string), e.g.
binutils> make[1]: Leaving directory '/build/binutils-2.31.1'
binutils-wrapper> unpacking sources
binutils-wrapper> patching sources
...
binutils-wrapper> Using dynamic linker: '/nix/store/kr51dlsj9v5cr4n8700jliyz8v5b2q7q-bootstrap-stage0-glibc/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2'
bootstrap-stage2-gcc-wrapper> unpacking sources
...
linux-headers> unpacking sources
linux-headers> unpacking source archive /nix/store/8javli69jhj3bkql2c35gsj5vl91p382-linux-4.19.16.tar.xz
It was getting confused between logical and real store paths.
Also, make fetchGit and fetchMercurial update allowedPaths properly.
(Maybe the evaluator, rather than the caller of the evaluator, should
apply toRealPath(), but that's a bigger change.)
This PR was not intended to be merged until those tests were actually
passing. So disable them for now to unbreak the flakes branch.
https://hydra.nixos.org/eval/1519271
The value of useChroot is not set yet in the constructor, resulting in
hash rewriting being enabled in certain cases where it should not be.
Fixes#2801
Sometimes, "expected" can be "0", but in fact means "unknown".
This is for example the case when downloading a file while the http
server doesn't send the `Content-Length` header, like when running `nix
build` pointing to a nixpkgs checkout streamed from GitHub:
⇒ nix build -f https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/master.tar.gz hello
[1.8/0.0 MiB DL] downloading 'https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/master.tar.gz'
In that case, don't show that weird progress bar, but only the (slowly
increasing) downloaded size ("done").
⇒ nix build -f https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/master.tar.gz hello
[1.8 MiB DL] downloading 'https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/master.tar.gz'
This commit also updates fmt calls with three numbers (when something is
currently 'running' too) - I'm not sure if this can be provoked, but
showing "0" as expected doesn't make any sense, as we're obviously doing
more than nothing.
I.e. flake3 depends on flake2 which depends on flake1. Currently this
fails with
error: indirect flake reference 'flake1' is not allowed
because we're not propagating lockfiles downwards properly.
Florian Klink