Rare project developers

[mc36 <>]

On 7/27/22 14:01, Alexander Gall wrote:
> It's more than that because each version of nixpkgs is completely
> self-contained and includes everything down to a bootstrapped version
> of the compiler. Different versions of libc, for example, will result
> in a very large overall difference in packages.  But I don't think we
> really have to worry about the footprint on disk very much.
agreed...


> > > I will not consider doing this (i.e. blindly upgrading everything) for
> > > the SDE. This *will* lead to failures and hard-to-track regressions.
>
> > btw are you sur about it? just asking because my dataplane tester vm
> > _is_ a debian sid, and the sde works fine as is, since it sandboxes
> > itself from the system libs... (maybe boost is what installed from apt)
> > regarding the kernel modules, when my stordis was near me, i ran that
> > box on stable+backported kernel and up to that point, except about 2-3
> > times, the module worked fine on the latest-greatest kernel...
>
> I'm not talking about the kernel modules. In fact, the kernel is not
> part of nixpkgs at all, i.e. it's irrelevant in this context.
i mentioned it because the sde except in model mode, one needs to compile
the 2 kernel modules from the sde... and on major kernel bumps, internal
api breaks and that was the above all about...

> The problem is the dependencies of the SDE. Some of them are pretty
> specific wrt versions, e.g. thrift and protobuf. Some of them need to
> be built with specific features. The requirements change with
> different versions of the SDE. Remember that I support all SDEs back
> to 9.1.1 (and I'd like to keep it that way because it's useful to be
> able to switch SDE versions when using bf-sde-nixpkgs as development
> environment).  I've had to make quite a few tweaks to the packages
first of all, i really don't see the point supporting something intel already 
dropped support for...
even for development... just think about what cacerts have in those packages? 
does it contain the
new letsencrypt root ca from last winter? without that, half the internet 
wont load from the nix shell,
rendering the whole stuff completely unusable.... :)

9.1.1 surely was designed to debian10 or older with it's old kernel,
so imho the kernel modules from the sde does not compile for the current
image we're on... simply those old kernel modules dont have the ifdefs
for the newer kernels...

moreover, once debian12 will be out, i bet you they'll require even newer 
packages...
so i believe you that for now you found a point in time when all your current 
sdes
compile and do something at least in model mode but believe me, that'll 
change with
as time passes by...

so as a complete noob to the nix packaging, cannot a given sde versions
describe itself to a given nix release version or so?
let's say you can keep the sde911 on the old packages, and bump everything 
above 990 to something newer...

br,
cs