~lschuermann

~lschuermann/nix-litex

Last active 2 days ago

~lschuermann/tock-patches

Last active 6 months ago
View more

Recent activity

[PATCH 3/3] pkgs: expose the maintenance scripts as a package 2 days ago

From to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

From: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>

Expose the maintenance scripts of this repository as a separate
"maintenance" package. It is only a loose collection of Python scripts
with the proper buildInputs defined. This is useful in particular for
maintenance of downstream packages.

Signed-off-by: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>
---
 pkgs/default.nix | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 shell.nix        |  4 +---
 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/pkgs/default.nix b/pkgs/default.nix
[message trimmed]

[PATCH 2/3] Add a maintenance script to render a requirements.txt file 2 days ago

From to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

From: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>

This adds a Python script to render a requirements.txt for pip3 to
read in. This can be used to install most of the LiteX and related
Python packages.

This will try to read a TOML file (defaulting to
./pkgs/litex_packages.toml), if necessary fetch required intermediate
information, and finally build a pip3-compatible requirements.txt
file.

This script is mostly useful for downstream repositories which would
like the Nix support and test suite provided by nix-litex, but offer
users the option to get the packages without using the Nix package
[message trimmed]

[PATCH 1/3] maintenance/update_packages: allow specifying TOML path 2 days ago

From to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

From: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>

To increase the utility of this maintenance script in other
repositories, allow specifiying the path to the TOML file containing
the package meta data as a command line parameter.

Furthermore, this changes this script such that it overwrites the
source files. This seems like the expected behavior for such an update
script and users are expected to employ some version control system in
their repositories which can recover the old version of the file in
case of unintended changes.

Signed-off-by: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>
---
[message trimmed]

[PATCH 0/3] Improvements to the repository maintenance scripts 2 days ago

From to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

From: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>

This patch series contains some improvements to the package
maintenance scripts. In particular, by removing assumptions about
repository paths and including the scripts in a special "maintenance"
package, it makes them accessible and usable for downstream users of
the nix-litex LiteX package definitions.

These patches, in particular the new `render_requirements_txt.py`,
have been tested and used in the tock-litex repository.

Leon Schuermann (3):
  maintenance/update_packages: allow specifying TOML path
  Add a maintenance script to render a requirements.txt file

[PATCH] Passthrough of the src attribute for LiteX packages 2 days ago

From to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

From: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>

This change makes the original source of the -pkg derivation
accessible from the final derivations, which combine the source and
tested derivations. It is common for the source of a package to be
reused in a slightly modified derivation, which this change allows.

Signed-off-by: Leon Schuermann <leon@is.currently.online>
---
 pkgs/default.nix | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/pkgs/default.nix b/pkgs/default.nix
index 23a8264..bed5242 100644
[message trimmed]

Re: [meta.sr.ht] Updating already existing PGP key not allowed 6 days ago

From Leon Schuermann to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

"Drew DeVault" <sir@cmpwn.com> writes:
> On Sat Aug 28, 2021 at 4:02 PM CEST, Ariadna Vigo wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> I wanted to report something that I would tend to classify as a bug on
>> meta.sr.ht: pasting an OpenPGP key with the same fingerprint as an
>> already registered one isn't allowed.
>
> This is not a bug. We have to be able to identify your account based on
> the PGP key and it cannot be ambiguous or we will not be able to
> positively identify the account associated with a key.

Just ran into this very same issue where I wanted to update my PGP
key. Weird thing was: even with the workaround of removing and re-adding
the PGP key, the software complained: "This PGP key is already

Hello World, testing testing 123... 6 days ago

From Leon Schuermann to ~lschuermann/nix-litex

Hi!

This is a test of the nix-litex project mailing list; please stand
by. beep boop.

Re: [PATCH nixpkgs] zellij: 0.8.0 -> 0.10.0 4 months ago

From Leon Schuermann to ~andir/nixpkgs-dev

Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de>
> ---
>  pkgs/tools/misc/zellij/default.nix | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

While it builds successfully on my machine, it gets stuck on some
tests. Unfortunately I don't have time to debug this much further, but
that might be something to watch out for?

Re: [PATCH] pythonPackages.cxxfilt: init at 0.2.2 5 months ago

From Leon Schuermann to ~andir/nixpkgs-dev

"Cole Helbling" <cole.e.helbling@outlook.com> writes:
> On Mon Apr 26, 2021 at 4:34 AM PDT, Leon Schuermann wrote:
>> After addressing the changes requested in the PR and rebasing on current
>> master, I noticed Cole Helbling (CCed) has apparently taken my patch and
>> addressed the comments in PR #120001 [1]. Thanks, though it would've
>> been nice to refer back to my original patch in a way I could've noticed
>> (via Email or GitHub notifications), to give credit and more importantly
>> inform the patch author that their patch landed or is in review
>> somewhere else.
>
> I actually had no idea somebody else had already tried to package this; it was a
> dependency for flare-floss (as you can see that PR), so I needed to get it
> packaged.

Re: [PATCH] pythonPackages.cxxfilt: init at 0.2.2 5 months ago

From Leon Schuermann to ~andir/nixpkgs-dev

William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com> writes:
> pr'd here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/119239

Thanks! Sorry for being rather unresponsive about this, it's been a busy
few weeks. :)

After addressing the changes requested in the PR and rebasing on current
master, I noticed Cole Helbling (CCed) has apparently taken my patch and
addressed the comments in PR #120001 [1]. Thanks, though it would've
been nice to refer back to my original patch in a way I could've noticed
(via Email or GitHub notifications), to give credit and more importantly
inform the patch author that their patch landed or is in review
somewhere else.