Lix overlay nix-prefetch-git upstream 2.18 does not exist anymore #632
	
		Labels
		
	
	
	
	No labels
	
		
			
	
	Affects/CppNix
		
			Affects/Nightly
		
			Affects/Only nightly
		
			Affects/Stable
		
			Area/build-packaging
		
			Area/cli
		
			Area/evaluator
		
			Area/fetching
		
			Area/flakes
		
			Area/language
		
			Area/lix ci
		
			Area/nix-eval-jobs
		
			Area/profiles
		
			Area/protocol
		
			Area/releng
		
			Area/remote-builds
		
			Area/repl
		
			Area/repl/debugger
		
			Area/store
		
			bug
		
			Context
contributors
		
			Context
drive-by
		
			Context
maintainers
		
			Context
RFD
		
			crash 💥
		
			Cross Compilation
		
			devx
		
			docs
		
			Downstream Dependents
		
			E/easy
		
			E/hard
		
			E/help wanted
		
			E/reproducible
		
			E/requires rearchitecture
		
			Feature/S3
		
			imported
		
			Language/Bash
		
			Language/C++
		
			Language/NixLang
		
			Language/Python
		
			Language/Rust
		
			Needs Langver
		
			OS/Linux
		
			OS/macOS
		
			performance
		
			regression
		
			release-blocker
		
			stability
		
			Status
blocked
		
			Status
invalid
		
			Status
postponed
		
			Status
wontfix
		
			testing
		
			testing/flakey
		
			Topic/Large Scale Installations
		
			ux
		
		
	
		No milestone
		
			
		
	No project
	
		
	
	
	
	
		No assignees
		
	
	
		
			
		
	
	
	
		3 participants
	
	
		
		
	Notifications
	
		
	
	
	
		
	
	
	Due date
No due date set.
	
		Dependencies
		
		
	
	
	No dependencies set.
	
	
		
	
	
		
			Reference
		
	
	
		
	
	
			lix-project/lix#632
			
		
	
		Loading…
	
	Add table
		Add a link
		
	
		Reference in a new issue
	
	
	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?
Describe the bug
Similar to lix-project/lix#591
Being on
nixpkgs-unstablechannel, without flakes, I try to build a rust package.useFetchCargoVendordepends onnix-prefetch-git1.Lix fakes version 2.18 and tries to defer to upstream 2.18 for the featurues that Lix doesn't support:
2.18 however, has been removed upstream2.
nix --versionoutputLix 2.92.0
Additional context
Could you maybe link to the commit that should've fixed this in 2.91.1-2 for yarn deps?
nixos/nixpkgs@253a786271/pkgs/build-support/rust/fetch-cargo-vendor.nix (L58)↩︎nixos/nixpkgs@253a786271/pkgs/tools/package-management/nix/default.nix (L160)↩︎I think this was fixed in a module revision? the code is definitely gone now as of
lix-project/nixos-module@30e488a7d5I'm not sure why this is broken for you; which version of the module are you using?
I just ran into this when I tried to both update nixpkgs-unstable pin and update the lix module to 2.92.0. On a hunch I updated to latest nixpkgs-unstable just now
9e4d5190a9482a1fb9d18adf0bdb83c6e506eaaband then bumped lix module and had a successful build.I am guessing this is caused by running an outdated version of lix-module since this code should not exist at all anymore. Closing, but if it's not fixed by updating lix-module please follow up.
Thanks mmlb, I didn't figure out that I had to bump the module manually, and I also forgot that I had to import it in each project separately.
Could this issue be turned into a documentation action please? I went through installing Lix, upgrading Lix and the beta guide before finding the link to switching to Lix again, where I saw that non-flake nixos configs hardcode a version number that I need to bump.
oh, ugh. there's not really a good way of doing the non-flakes one, since you have to pin hashes if you want your stuff to work properly. the documentation is there as a starting point for you to adapt to whatever you use for this, npins, niv, etc, but if you use it as-written it is a pain to update. I can file a bug, but I don't really know what needs changing in the documentation to realistically actually fix this.
here's a bug filing: lix-project/lix-website#43
since 2.91 at the very least the module will complain at you if it's too old for the version of Lix it has, but it might have been too late to complain for this to have been visible for you.
Probably, I upgraded from 2.90. Thanks!