It’s totally valid to have entries in `NIX_PATH` that aren’t valid paths
(they can even be arbitrary urls or `channel:<channel-name>`).
Fix#5998 and #5980
if we defer the duplicate argument check for lambda formals we can use more
efficient data structures for the formals set, and we can get rid of the
duplication of formals names to boot. instead of a list of formals we've seen
and a set of names we'll keep a vector instead and run a sort+dupcheck step
before moving the parsed formals into a newly created lambda. this improves
performance on search and rebuild by ~1%, pure parsing gains more (about 4%).
this does reorder lambda arguments in the xml output, but the output is still
stable. this shouldn't be a problem since argument order is not semantically
important anyway.
before
nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello
Time (mean ± σ): 8.550 s ± 0.060 s [User: 6.470 s, System: 1.664 s]
Range (min … max): 8.435 s … 8.666 s 20 runs
nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix
Time (mean ± σ): 346.7 ms ± 2.1 ms [User: 312.4 ms, System: 34.2 ms]
Range (min … max): 343.8 ms … 353.4 ms 20 runs
nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system'
Time (mean ± σ): 2.720 s ± 0.031 s [User: 2.415 s, System: 0.231 s]
Range (min … max): 2.662 s … 2.780 s 20 runs
after
nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello
Time (mean ± σ): 8.462 s ± 0.063 s [User: 6.398 s, System: 1.661 s]
Range (min … max): 8.339 s … 8.542 s 20 runs
nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix
Time (mean ± σ): 329.1 ms ± 1.4 ms [User: 296.8 ms, System: 32.3 ms]
Range (min … max): 326.1 ms … 330.8 ms 20 runs
nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system'
Time (mean ± σ): 2.687 s ± 0.035 s [User: 2.392 s, System: 0.228 s]
Range (min … max): 2.626 s … 2.754 s 20 runs
This removes a dynamic stack allocation, making the derivation
unparsing logic robust against overflows when large strings are
added to a derivation.
Overflow behavior depends on the platform and stack configuration.
For instance, x86_64-linux/glibc behaves as (somewhat) expected:
$ (ulimit -s 20000; nix-instantiate tests/lang/eval-okay-big-derivation-attr.nix)
error: stack overflow (possible infinite recursion)
$ (ulimit -s 40000; nix-instantiate tests/lang/eval-okay-big-derivation-attr.nix)
error: expression does not evaluate to a derivation (or a set or list of those)
However, on aarch64-darwin:
$ nix-instantiate big-attr.nix ~
zsh: segmentation fault nix-instantiate big-attr.nix
This indicates a slight flaw in the single stack protection page
approach that is not encountered with normal stack frames.
Unless `--precise` is passed, make `nix why-depends` only show the
dependencies between the store paths, without introspecting them to
find the actual references.
This also makes it ~3x faster
There already existed a smoke test for the link content length,
but it appears that there exists some corruptions pernicious enough
to replace the file content with zeros, and keeping the same length.
--repair-path now goes as far as checking the content of the link,
making it true to its name and actually repairing the path for such
coruption cases.
nixpkgs can save a good bit of eval memory with this primop. zipAttrsWith is
used quite a bit around nixpkgs (eg in the form of recursiveUpdate), but the
most costly application for this primop is in the module system. it improves
the implementation of zipAttrsWith from nixpkgs by not checking an attribute
multiple times if it occurs more than once in the input list, allocates less
values and set elements, and just avoids many a temporary object in general.
nixpkgs has a more generic version of this operation, zipAttrsWithNames, but
this version is only used once so isn't suitable for being the base of a new
primop. if it were to be used more we should add a second primop instead.
When we check for disappeared overrides, we can get "false positives"
for follows and overrides which are defined in the dependencies of the
flake we are locking, since they are not parsed by
parseFlakeInputs. However, at that point we already know that the
overrides couldn't have possible been changed if the input itself
hasn't changed (since we check that oldLock->originalRef == *input.ref
for the input's parent). So, to prevent this, only perform this check
when it was possible that the flake changed (e.g. the flake we're
locking, or a new input, or the input has changed and mustRefetch ==
true).
When a variable is assigned in the REPL, make sure to remove any possible reference to the old one so that we correctly pick the new one afterwards
Fix#5706
Previously, when we were attempting to reuse the old lockfile
information in the computeLocks function, we have passed the parent of
the current input to the next computeLocks call. This was incorrect,
since the follows are resolved relative to the parent. This caused
issues when we tried to reuse oldLock but couldn't for some
reason (read: mustRefetch is true), in that case the follows were
resolved incorrectly.
Fix this by passing the correct parent, and adding some tests to
prevent this particular regression from happening again.
Closes https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/5697
If we’re in pure eval mode, then tell that in the error message rather
than (wrongly) speaking about restricted mode.
Fix https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/5611
Robert Hensing