Add packages and hydraJobs to flake outputs #17

Manually merged
abonerib merged 1 commits from abonerib/bscpkgs:hydraJobs into master 2025-09-26 16:13:55 +02:00
Collaborator

Not sure if having both packages and legacyPackages can be a problem. So far I have not run into any issues, but I have not tried anything too fancy.

I am running a hydra service on weasel (@ weasel:3001) to see if it is any useful. It runs on top of this branch to run the bsc-ci through hydra and keep the nix store up to date. The main problem I have found with hydra is that it spams the journal logs like crazy...

Not sure if having both `packages` and `legacyPackages` can be a problem. So far I have not run into any issues, but I have not tried anything too fancy. I am running a hydra service on weasel (@ `weasel:3001`) to see if it is any useful. It runs on top of this branch to run the `bsc-ci` through hydra and keep the nix store up to date. The main problem I have found with hydra is that it spams the journal logs like crazy...
abonerib added 2 commits 2025-09-26 13:03:08 +02:00
rarias reviewed 2025-09-26 13:34:50 +02:00
flake.nix Outdated
@ -16,0 +29,4 @@
(flip getAttrs pkgs)
(flip removeAttrs [ "bsc" ])
(filterAttrs (_: isDerivation))
];

I would wait until we have a problem that needs us to use packages, and then we can think how to make this simpler. For now, legacyPackages seems to be enough.

I would wait until we have a problem that needs us to use packages, and then we can think how to make this simpler. For now, legacyPackages seems to be enough.
abonerib marked this conversation as resolved
flake.nix Outdated
@ -16,0 +32,4 @@
];
hydraJobs = {
inherit (self.legacyPackages.x86_64-linux.bsc-ci) test;

s/x86_64-linux/${system}/?

`s/x86_64-linux/${system}/`?
abonerib marked this conversation as resolved
flake.nix Outdated
@ -16,0 +33,4 @@
hydraJobs = {
inherit (self.legacyPackages.x86_64-linux.bsc-ci) test;
packages = self.packages.${system};

Can we just use self.legacyPackages.${system}.bsc-ci.pkgs? If you want to have package granularity, we could expose the bscPkgs package set in bsc-ci, then use that attribute here. I would rename the current bsc-ci.pkgs to bsc-ci.pkgsList and use bsc-ci.pkgs as the bscPkgs, so it is less confusing.

Can we just use `self.legacyPackages.${system}.bsc-ci.pkgs`? If you want to have package granularity, we could expose the bscPkgs package set in bsc-ci, then use that attribute here. I would rename the current bsc-ci.pkgs to bsc-ci.pkgsList and use bsc-ci.pkgs as the bscPkgs, so it is less confusing.
abonerib marked this conversation as resolved
rarias requested review from rarias 2025-09-26 13:34:57 +02:00
abonerib force-pushed hydraJobs from 6491ba90ad to e07d9f21dc 2025-09-26 14:31:07 +02:00 Compare
rarias approved these changes 2025-09-26 15:29:46 +02:00
rarias force-pushed hydraJobs from e07d9f21dc to 2ffdd53d86 2025-09-26 16:13:32 +02:00 Compare
abonerib manually merged commit 2ffdd53d86 into master 2025-09-26 16:13:55 +02:00
This repo is archived. You cannot comment on pull requests.
No Reviewers
No Label
2 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: rarias/bscpkgs#17
No description provided.