Pass this around instead of `Source &` and `Sink &` directly. This will
give us something to put the protocol version on once the time comes.
To do this ergonomically, we need to expose `RemoteStore::Connection`,
so do that too. Give it some more API docs while we are at it.
See API docs on that struct for why. The pasing as as template argument
doesn't yet happen in that commit, but will instead happen in later
commit.
Also make `WorkerOp` (now `Op`) and enum struct. This led us to catch
that two operations were not handled!
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
This is generally a fine practice: Putting implementations in headers
makes them harder to read and slows compilation. Unfortunately it is
necessary for templates, but we can ameliorate that by putting them in a
separate header. Only files which need to instantiate those templates
will need to include the header with the implementation; the rest can
just include the declaration.
This is now documenting in the contributing guide.
Also, it just happens that these polymorphic serializers are the
protocol agnostic ones. (Worker and serve protocol have the same logic
for these container types.) This means by doing this general template
cleanup, we are also getting a head start on better indicating which
code is protocol-specific and which code is shared between protocols.
This is the more typically way to do [Argument-dependent
lookup](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/adl)-leveraging
generic serializers in C++. It makes the relationship between the `read`
and `write` methods more clear and rigorous, and also looks more
familiar to users coming from other languages that do not have C++'s
libertine ad-hoc overloading.
I am returning to this because during the review in
https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/6223, it came up as something that
would make the code easier to read --- easier today hopefully already,
but definitely easier if we were have multiple codified protocols with
code sharing between them as that PR seeks to accomplish.
If I recall correctly, the main criticism of this the first time around
(in 2020) was that having to specify the type when writing, e.g.
`WorkerProto<MyType>::write`, was too verbose and cumbersome. This is
now addressed with the `workerProtoWrite` wrapper function.
This method is also the way `nlohmann::json`, which we have used for a
number of years now, does its serializers, for what its worth.
This reverts commit 45a0ed82f0. That
commit in turn reverted 9ab07e99f5.
In other words, use a plain `ContentAddress` not
`ContentAddressWithReferences` for `DerivationOutput::CAFixed`.
Supporting fixed output derivations with (fixed) references would be a
cool feature, but it is out of scope at this moment.
This is non-breaking change in the to-JSON direction. This *is* a
breaking change in the from-JSON direction, but we don't care, as that
is brand new in this PR.
`nix show-derivation --help` currently has the sole public documentation
of this format, it is updated accordingly.
`DerivedPath::Built` and `DerivationGoal` were previously using a
regular set with the convention that the empty set means all outputs.
But it is easy to forget about this rule when processing those sets.
Using `OutputSpec` forces us to get it right.
Impure derivations are derivations that can produce a different result
every time they're built. Example:
stdenv.mkDerivation {
name = "impure";
__impure = true; # marks this derivation as impure
outputHashAlgo = "sha256";
outputHashMode = "recursive";
buildCommand = "date > $out";
};
Some important characteristics:
* This requires the 'impure-derivations' experimental feature.
* Impure derivations are not "cached". Thus, running "nix-build" on
the example above multiple times will cause a rebuild every time.
* They are implemented similar to CA derivations, i.e. the output is
moved to a content-addressed path in the store. The difference is
that we don't register a realisation in the Nix database.
* Pure derivations are not allowed to depend on impure derivations. In
the future fixed-output derivations will be allowed to depend on
impure derivations, thus forming an "impurity barrier" in the
dependency graph.
* When sandboxing is enabled, impure derivations can access the
network in the same way as fixed-output derivations. In relaxed
sandboxing mode, they can access the local filesystem.
Rather than having four different but very similar types of hashes, make
only one, with a tag indicating whether it corresponds to a regular of
deferred derivation.
This implies a slight logical change: The original Nix+multiple-outputs
model assumed only one hash-modulo per derivation. Adding
multiple-outputs CA derivations changed this as these have one
hash-modulo per output. This change is now treating each derivation as
having one hash modulo per output.
This obviously means that we internally loose the guaranty that
all the outputs of input-addressed derivations have the same hash
modulo. But it turns out that it doesn’t matter because there’s nothing
in the code taking advantage of that fact (and it probably shouldn’t
anyways).
The upside is that it is now much easier to work with these hashes, and
we can get rid of a lot of useless `std::visit{ overloaded`.
Co-authored-by: John Ericson <John.Ericson@Obsidian.Systems>
1. `DerivationOutput` now as the `std::variant` as a base class. And the
variants are given hierarchical names under `DerivationOutput`.
In 8e0d0689be @matthewbauer and I
didn't know a better idiom, and so we made it a field. But this sort
of "newtype" is anoying for literals downstream.
Since then we leaned the base class, inherit the constructors trick,
e.g. used in `DerivedPath`. Switching to use that makes this more
ergonomic, and consistent.
2. `store-api.hh` and `derivations.hh` are now independent.
In bcde5456cc I swapped the dependency,
but I now know it is better to just keep on using incomplete types as
much as possible for faster compilation and good separation of
concerns.
This changes was taken from dynamic derivation (#4628). It` somewhat
undoes the refactors I first did for floating CA derivations, as the
benefit of hindsight + requirements of dynamic derivations made me
reconsider some things.
They aren't to consequential, but I figured they might be good to land
first, before the more profound changes @thufschmitt has in the works.
Robert Hensing