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

cbmc: 6.4.0 -> 6.4.1, fix darwin, drop unnecessary cadical dependency #372193

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jan 12, 2025

Conversation

xokdvium
Copy link
Contributor

@xokdvium xokdvium commented Jan 8, 2025

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/)
  • 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 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.

This is cruft left over from <https://www.github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/355122>,
which got rid of the patch to use compiled cadical instead of building from source.
Apply portability patch for darwin (makes sense for linux as well).
NIX_CFLAGS_COMPILE for GNU don't seem to be necessary anymore.
There's no reason to use passthru.tests for this and manual
<doc/stdenv/passthru.chapter.md> recommends to do this by default.
versionCheckHook
];
doInstallCheck = true;
versionCheckProgram = "${placeholder "out"}/bin/cbmc";
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Using pname is already the default. I think that you can drop this line.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think in general it's discouraged to rely on pname (e.g. in src #277994). I think it applies in this case as well. More fitting would be meta.mainProgram, but cbmc doesn't have a primary binary. Being a bit more explicit in this case doesn't hurt.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right about not relying generally on pname, but here it's not really the same.
The hook rightfully defaults to calling the binary of the same name as the package.
versionCheckProgram is only expected to be provided when the binary has a different name than pname.

@GaetanLepage
Copy link
Contributor

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 372193


x86_64-linux

✅ 1 package built:
  • cbmc

aarch64-linux

✅ 1 package built:
  • cbmc

x86_64-darwin

✅ 1 package built:
  • cbmc

aarch64-darwin

✅ 1 package built:
  • cbmc

@wegank wegank added 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one reputable person 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in the package labels Jan 9, 2025
@FliegendeWurst FliegendeWurst merged commit f24828e into NixOS:master Jan 12, 2025
24 checks passed
@xokdvium xokdvium deleted the dev/cbmc-bump branch January 13, 2025 18:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one reputable person 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in the package
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants