lix-project/lix
20
57
Fork 31
Code Issues 349 Code Review (Gerrit) Projects 3 Releases Wiki Activity

nix flake show prints log on same lines as output instead of clearing. #425

New issue
Closed
opened 2024-06-26 22:31:26 +00:00 by whovian9369 · 9 comments
whovian9369 commented 2024-06-26 22:31:26 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Describe the bug

When using nix flake show (as that's all I've tested with), the evaluation log output is not correctly cleared as would be expected.

Steps To Reproduce

  1. Print a flake's outputs using nix flake show

Expected behavior

Output was expected to be printed without log messages staying in output lines.

nix --version output

nix (Lix, like Nix) 2.91.0-dev-pre20240624-d5637ee

Additional context

Here's some example outputs of current behaviour:

$ nix flake show
 path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437134&narHash=sha256-JoBipcHBsDwEHIRgmf6EqM4rNxgvvjBHohnhUyf6rJo%3D
 evaluating ''└───packages
 evaluating 'packages'    └───x86_64-linux
 evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux'        ├───default: package 'rom-properties-git'
 evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.default'        ├───rom-properties_gtracker: package 'rom-properties-git'
 evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.rom-properties_gtracker'        ├───rom-properties_ninja: package 'rom-properties-git'
 evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.rom-properties_ninja'        └───rom-properties_ninja_gtracker: package 'rom-properties-git'

$  nix flake show
 path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437642&narHash=sha256-NwVUfxxpx/XDPwBnLbv5FB5ldzgYs67wNgQlKvUMnl4%3D
 evaluating ''└───packages
 evaluating 'packages'    └───x86_64-linux
 evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux'        └───default: package 'binaryobjectscanner-3.1.13'
## Describe the bug When using `nix flake show` (as that's all I've tested with), the evaluation log output is not correctly cleared as would be expected. ## Steps To Reproduce 1. Print a flake's outputs using `nix flake show` ## Expected behavior Output was expected to be printed without log messages staying in output lines. ## `nix --version` output `nix (Lix, like Nix) 2.91.0-dev-pre20240624-d5637ee` ## Additional context Here's some example outputs of current behaviour: ``` $ nix flake show path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437134&narHash=sha256-JoBipcHBsDwEHIRgmf6EqM4rNxgvvjBHohnhUyf6rJo%3D evaluating ''└───packages evaluating 'packages' └───x86_64-linux evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux' ├───default: package 'rom-properties-git' evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.default' ├───rom-properties_gtracker: package 'rom-properties-git' evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.rom-properties_gtracker' ├───rom-properties_ninja: package 'rom-properties-git' evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux.rom-properties_ninja' └───rom-properties_ninja_gtracker: package 'rom-properties-git' $ nix flake show path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437642&narHash=sha256-NwVUfxxpx/XDPwBnLbv5FB5ldzgYs67wNgQlKvUMnl4%3D evaluating ''└───packages evaluating 'packages' └───x86_64-linux evaluating 'packages.x86_64-linux' └───default: package 'binaryobjectscanner-3.1.13' ```
whovian9369 added the
bug
 label 2024-06-26 22:31:26 +00:00
pennae commented 2024-06-26 22:37:37 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

@kloenk could this be related to the progress bar refactors? that was the only bigger change in this area of the code recently (and since it's already caused behavioral changes like #424 it seems plausible that we missed things in review?)

@kloenk could this be related to the progress bar refactors? that was the only bigger change in this area of the code recently (and since it's already caused behavioral changes like #424 it seems plausible that we missed things in review?)
jade commented 2024-06-26 23:30:56 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

i hit this yesterday as well. plausible it's a progress bar behaviour change.

i hit this yesterday as well. plausible it's a progress bar behaviour change.
whovian9369 commented 2024-06-26 23:47:47 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

As an update, I'm doing some builds locally and 697ef65c14 does not appear to suffer from this issue. (Thank you pennae for mentioning the progress bar changes that led me to trying this specific commit.)
I'll keep doing some manual bisects to see what I can figure out on my end.

EDIT: e44dcd63c4 seems to be fine too.
EDIT: 37f276ba9d seems to have this issue, so going to keep bisecting.
EDIT: e09cc60df9 seems to have this issue, so going to keep bisecting.
EDIT: 375f4c0337 seems to be fine!

EDIT: After my own bisection efforts, I'm pretty sure that da4e46dd1f introduced the issue. Can't confirm it 100% or write a fix, but I'm pretty sure that's it based on the findings.

As an update, I'm doing some builds locally and 697ef65c148a48e5d8255b6425b6ca3a5b7d0be8 does _not_ appear to suffer from this issue. (Thank you pennae for mentioning the progress bar changes that led me to trying this specific commit.) I'll keep doing some manual bisects to see what I can figure out on my end. EDIT: e44dcd63c4d96807536cdcf2afb688a537cce9be seems to be fine too. EDIT: 37f276ba9d1856a6093e0d347224ab7c1982e75f seems to have this issue, so going to keep bisecting. EDIT: e09cc60df9698f268fa06ed1d9879101687b9eff seems to have this issue, so going to keep bisecting. EDIT: 375f4c033753db2c20af398211e892ddc9d29ec1 seems to be fine! EDIT: After my own bisection efforts, I'm pretty sure that da4e46dd1fc04067b5ba4bc16dd68134fa7efad2 introduced the issue. Can't confirm it 100% or write a fix, but I'm pretty sure that's it based on the findings.
kloenk commented 2024-06-27 11:07:43 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Eh yeah quite possible that it's from there. thought I tested that as well, but guess it got lost. Will try to come up with a fix when I have the time

Eh yeah quite possible that it's from there. thought I tested that as well, but guess it got lost. Will try to come up with a fix when I have the time
whovian9369 commented 2024-06-29 03:24:29 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

This also appears to affect nix search nixpkgs {search_term_here}, so it definitely seems to be related to Flakes in general, instead of just nix flake commands like I had hoped.
I know that was likely expected from the start, but figured it good to update here anyway.

This also appears to affect `nix search nixpkgs {search_term_here}`, so it definitely seems to be related to Flakes in general, instead of just `nix flake` commands like I had hoped. I know that was likely expected from the start, but figured it good to update here anyway.
whovian9369 commented 2024-06-30 06:56:00 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Seems to be fixed for me, after I did a rebuild ~20 hours ago.

$  nix --version
nix (Lix, like Nix) 2.91.0-dev-pre20240626-5dc85e8

$ nix flake show
path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437642&narHash=sha256-NwVUfxxpx/XDPwBnLbv5FB5ldzgYs67wNgQlKvUMnl4%3D
└───packages
    └───x86_64-linux
        └───default: package 'binaryobjectscanner-3.1.13'

Edit: Just checked out the Lix commit ID against the currently pushed commits, and logically there's no reason that this should have fixed itself. I'm quite confused now...

Seems to be fixed for me, after I did a rebuild ~20 hours ago. ``` $ nix --version nix (Lix, like Nix) 2.91.0-dev-pre20240626-5dc85e8 $ nix flake show path:/home/whovian/.flakes/temp?lastModified=1719437642&narHash=sha256-NwVUfxxpx/XDPwBnLbv5FB5ldzgYs67wNgQlKvUMnl4%3D └───packages └───x86_64-linux └───default: package 'binaryobjectscanner-3.1.13' ``` Edit: Just checked out the Lix commit ID against the currently pushed commits, and logically there's no reason that this should have fixed itself. I'm quite confused now...
jade commented 2024-06-30 07:31:53 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

confirmed, seems fixed on my machine, gonna close

confirmed, seems fixed on my machine, gonna close
jade closed this issue 2024-06-30 07:31:53 +00:00
jade commented 2024-06-30 19:53:20 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

fix commit was 3dd7d023f4

fix commit was 3dd7d023f496d97bc9cb1a5fcf889acccfd4a711
lix-bot commented 2024-07-02 15:24:58 +00:00
Member
Copy link

This issue was mentioned on Gerrit on the following CLs:

<!-- GERRIT_LINKBOT: {"cls": [{"backlink": "https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1561", "number": 1561, "kind": "commit message"}], "cl_meta": {"1561": {"change_title": "libmain: better fix for #424, #425"}}} --> This issue was mentioned on Gerrit on the following CLs: * commit message in [cl/1561](https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1561) ("libmain: better fix for #424, #425")
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
release-2.91
sb/raito/phantom-referrers-gc
repl-overlay-example
reuse-compliance
release-2.90
git-series/activity-cleanup
sb/tom-hubrecht/primops.cc-v2
sb/bacchanalia/cache-strlen%topic=substr-perf
sb/arcuru/commit-msg
sb/qyriad/beta-1
sb/qyriad/2.90-beta.0
rbt/pre-commit-update
sb/rbt/test-branch
sb/rbt/justfile
sb/rbt/repl-overlays
sb/fuck/what
sb/rbt/pre-commit
sb/rbt/makeflags
sb/pennae/io-rewrite
sb/qyriad/maint-meson
sb/qyriad/maint/meson
sb/puck/meson-c-api
sb/pennae/parser-rewrite
sb/jade/burn-it-all
dependabot/github_actions/zeebe-io/backport-action-2.4.1
dependabot/github_actions/cachix/install-nix-action-25
dependabot/github_actions/actions/labeler-5
dependabot/github_actions/cachix/cachix-action-14
2.91.1
2.91.0
2.90.0
2.90.0-rc1
2.90-beta.1
2.90-beta.0
Labels
Clear labels   
Area/build-packaging

regarding the building or packaging of Lix itself

  
Area/cli

The command line interface of Lix

  
Area/evaluator

libexpr and anything else related to the evaluation of Nix expressions

  
Area/fetching

Fetching sources or other materials from the World Wide Web in Lix

  
Area/flakes

   
Area/language

language design, features, extensions, etc

  
Area/profiles

profiles: nix-env, nix profile, and installer flavors all alike

  
Area/protocol

The protocol, used for communicating between the client and the daemon

  
Area/releng

Release engineering

  
Area/remote-builds

remote builds

  
Area/repl

nix repl

  
Area/store

libstore and anything else relating to the Nix store

  
bug

it's a bug

  
crash 💥

Lix crashes (possibly bad error handling)

  
Cross Compilation

   
devx

development experience issues

  
docs

requires or is about documentation changes

  
Downstream Dependents

regarding an external tool's usage with Lix (e.g. nix-eval-jobs)

  
E/easy

bug is relatively simple and could simply be fixed with some minor effort

  
E/hard

this issue should probably be solved with close involvement of an expert

  
E/help wanted

maintainers may not get to this soon, but we want it fixed

  
E/reproducible

This bug is reproducible and obvious.

  
E/requires rearchitecture

this bug cannot be fixed properly without fixing a known architectural flaw

  
imported

Issue imported from upstream nix (please do not remove this label, it will cause dupes if import is rerun)

  
Needs Langver

We can't get to this until we implement language versioning

  
OS/Linux

Affects specifically Lix on Linux

  
OS/macOS

Affects specifically Lix on macOS

  
performance

make lix go faster

  
regression

This is a regression since some previous version of Lix

  
release-blocker

Blocks public release

  
RFD

Request for discussion

  
stability

Fixing this makes the software more stable

  
Status
blocked
Blocked on something

  
Status
invalid
not our bug, duplicate, similar

  
Status
postponed
closed but should maybe look at later (generally with S-wontfix)

  
Status
wontfix
We chose not to change this (see issue comments for more detail).

  
testing

Tests that should be added

  
testing/flakey

Tests that are unreliable/flakey (not to be confused with flakes that test)

  
ux

makes the user experience better :)

No labels
Area/build-packaging
Area/cli
Area/evaluator
Area/fetching
Area/flakes
Area/language
Area/profiles
Area/protocol
Area/releng
Area/remote-builds
Area/repl
Area/store
bug
crash 💥
Cross Compilation
devx
docs
Downstream Dependents
E/easy
E/hard
E/help wanted
E/reproducible
E/requires rearchitecture
imported
Needs Langver
OS/Linux
OS/macOS
performance
regression
release-blocker
RFD
stability
Status
blocked
Status
invalid
Status
postponed
Status
wontfix
testing
testing/flakey
ux
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
5 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: lix-project/lix#425
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?