Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

crabfit-api: fix Rust 1.80.0 build regression #335472

Merged

Conversation

tomodachi94
Copy link
Member

Description of changes

Tracking: #332957
Upstream issue: GRA0007/crab.fit#340
Upstream patch: GRA0007/crab.fit#341

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

Why are so many crates being updated, not just time?

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

This package has no maintainer — are you interested?

@tomodachi94
Copy link
Member Author

Why are so many crates being updated, not just time?

When I attempted cargo update time, nothing changed (I presume one of the package's other dependencies has a strict requirement for time), so I resorted to a full cargo update.

This package has no maintainer — are you interested?

I don't personally use this package, so I don't feel that I'd adequately maintain the package.

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

Does cargo update --recursive time work? I just learned about it recently in another update.

@tomodachi94 tomodachi94 force-pushed the fix/crabfit-api/rust-1.80-regression branch from 72b875c to 0695af0 Compare August 22, 2024 03:50
@tomodachi94
Copy link
Member Author

tomodachi94 commented Aug 22, 2024

Does cargo update --recursive time work? I just learned about it recently in another update.

I had to relax the dependency on chrono, but it seems to work:

# Modify api/common/Cargo.toml to relax the dependency on chrono, then...
cargo update chrono
cargo update [email protected] --precise 0.3.36

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

There shouldn't be any need to update time 0.1.x — it's only 0.3.x that has the build failure.

@tomodachi94 tomodachi94 force-pushed the fix/crabfit-api/rust-1.80-regression branch from 0695af0 to f527ee5 Compare August 23, 2024 05:06
@tomodachi94
Copy link
Member Author

tomodachi94 commented Aug 23, 2024

There shouldn't be any need to update time 0.1.x — it's only 0.3.x that has the build failure.

Good catch. This PR now just bumps their copy of 0.3 time to the latest (and crates it depends on that time needed to be newer).

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

It still seems a bit strange to me that so many dependencies need to be updated? What command did you run to generate this lockfile?

@tomodachi94
Copy link
Member Author

tomodachi94 commented Aug 24, 2024

What command did you run to generate this lockfile?

I used this command:

cargo update [email protected] --precise 0.3.36
# Note: 0.3.36 was the latest at the time of this PR

@alyssais alyssais merged commit de1be8c into NixOS:master Aug 24, 2024
25 of 26 checks passed
@tomodachi94 tomodachi94 deleted the fix/crabfit-api/rust-1.80-regression branch August 24, 2024 20:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants