pcsx2: rework #325562

AndersonTorres · 2024-07-08T15:15:50Z

Description of changes

Merging two packages into one is not a good idea at all. Let's split it.

Things done

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

matteo-pacini · 2024-07-08T15:21:20Z

@AndersonTorres can we get this merged first, as it's been around for a while? 🙏🏻

#324113

superherointj · 2024-07-08T15:22:43Z

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/package.nix

+    repo = "pcsx2";
+    fetchSubmodules = true;
+    rev = "v${finalAttrs.version}";
+    sha256 = "sha256-WiwnP5yoBy8bRLUPuCZ7z4nhIzrY8P29KS5ZjErM/A4=";


Suggested change

sha256 = "sha256-WiwnP5yoBy8bRLUPuCZ7z4nhIzrY8P29KS5ZjErM/A4=";

hash = "sha256-WiwnP5yoBy8bRLUPuCZ7z4nhIzrY8P29KS5ZjErM/A4=";

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/package.nix

AndersonTorres · 2024-07-08T15:29:06Z

@AndersonTorres can we get this merged first, as it's been around for a while? 🙏🏻

#324113

Oh I can.

afh · 2024-07-08T19:42:44Z

Thanks for pinging me on this one, @AndersonTorres. Possibly my understanding of a package differs from what nixpkgs considers a package. In my mind a package is a piece of software that can be installed, regardless of whether from source or from binary.

This PR seems to suggest that nixpkgs differentiates between source builds and binary installs. Can you please point me to documentation that outlines the reasons why such a distinction is made? I'm genuinely curious 🙂

superherointj · 2024-07-08T19:51:31Z

Thanks for pinging me on this one, @AndersonTorres. Possibly my understanding of a package differs from what nixpkgs considers a package. In my mind a package is a piece of software that can be installed, regardless of whether from source or from binary.

This PR seems to suggest that nixpkgs differentiates between source builds and binary installs. Can you please point me to documentation that outlines the reasons why such a distinction is made? I'm genuinely curious 🙂

I believe, the matter is how packages are referenced by-name, not some conceptual notion of package.

https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0140-simple-package-paths.md

Two top-level entries, two directories. Is that the issue?

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2-bin/package.nix

AndersonTorres · 2024-07-09T01:22:39Z

@afh

In my mind a package is a piece of software that can be installed, regardless of whether from source or from binary.

Yes, let's pick this definition.

This PR seems to suggest that nixpkgs differentiates between source builds and binary installs.

The difference is more pronounced. This is a similar situation from vlc vs vlc-bin:

Both packages follow completely distinct methods of deployment:

One is binary-only, MacOS-only, can't be customized and merely repacked.
The other is effectively deployed from sources, and albeit being Linux-only, it can possibly be customized.

Further, it creates an unreasonable coupling.
Suppose the next release of PCSX2 uses new libraries.
The precompiled file can be released almost immediately, while the script to build the source one needs to be revised and updated.
It makes no sense to couple both releases to the same script.

AndersonTorres · 2024-07-10T03:47:46Z

Now we have a "small" problem: Darwin users will need to call pcsx2-bin instead of merely pcsx.

If this is such a big issue, I can rename pcsx2 to pcsx2-src and green-alias both according to the platform.

afh · 2024-07-10T05:46:29Z

Possibly I'm misguided by my own misconceptions of nixpkgs or general preconceptions or even both 😅

First and foremost as written words can easily misread in their tone:
The mindset in which the following was written was friendly, appreciative, cooperative, and constructive. If it is perceived it otherwise for whatever reasons I kindly ask you, esteemed reader, to re-read this comment in the intended spirit and would appreciate feedback where the wording was misunderstood or ill-chosen 🙂

I think separating packages by platform or installation method, i.e. from source or pre-built binary is heading into the right direction, yet there are several things that don't feel right to me about this as it is currently.

I find that a -bin or -src suffix makes discovering the package harder than it needs to be.
The -bin or -src suffix in this PR seem to be bound to the platform that the package is being installed on. What if in the future nixpkgs would like to offer a upstream-built binary for linux of pcsx2? Where would that reside in the nixpkgs (repo) tree?
As a user of a platform—in this case darwin—it does not matter to me whether the package is going to be installed from source or a pre-built binary and I would find it confusing if the package were named differently, in this case pcsx2-bin especially if the reason for this is a technical issue, possibly even a limitation of the current state of nixpkgs.
As a maintainer or contributor I'd prefer all related Nix code to reside under a single directory (or as much as possible)

I'm very much in favor of the pkgs/by-name direction that nixpkgs is heading in (especially with NixOS/rfc#146 and #325357 being actively worked on 👏) yet I do see value in a os-specific tree. Would it be possible and improve this PR by git mv pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2-bin/package.nix pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/darwin.nix and adding pcsx2 = ../pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/darwin.nix { }; to pkgs/top-level/darwin-packages.nix?

Another approach could be to pcsx2 = pkgs.pcsx2-bin; in pkgs/top-level/darwin-aliases.nix and somehow inform darwin users who are trying to install pcsx2 that the package is available on their platforms as darwin.pcsx2 and/or pcsx2-bin.

I don't think I properly understand what you mean by "green-alias", @AndersonTorres, could you provide more context and an example, please?

AndersonTorres · 2024-07-10T13:34:20Z

I think separating packages by platform or installation method, i.e. from source or pre-built binary is heading into the right direction, yet there are several things that don't feel right to me about this as it is currently.
1. I find that a `-bin` or `-src` suffix makes discovering the package harder than it needs to be.

The idea is to write something like

pcsx2 = if stdenv.isDarwin then pcsx2-bin else pcsx2-src;

2. The `-bin` or `-src` suffix in this PR seem to be bound to the platform that the package is being installed on.

Not exactly. The -bin is bound to the platform by its own nature, but -src is bound because we didn't figure out how to build it for both.

What if in the future nixpkgs would like to offer a upstream-built binary for linux of pcsx2?

In Nixpkgs we prefer source-based builds. The upstream binary package would be rejected.
Indeed we are only including the MacOS binary package because we didn't figure how to build it from sources yet.

The only exception I can imagine is when the binary package has some closed-source extras that are not included by default on the sources.

I don't think I properly understand what you mean by "green-alias", @AndersonTorres, could you provide more context and an example, please?

By design, aliases put in pkgs/top-level/aliases.nix are rejected by OfBorg, in the following sense: using pkgconfig in your code is fine, but when uploading it to Nixpkgs, ofBorg selectively ignores aliases.nix and do not recognize pkgconfig as an alias for pkg-config.

A "green alias" would be one put in all-packages.nix.

afh · 2024-07-10T14:11:00Z

I'm very much for the idea to:

pcsx2 = if stdenv.isDarwin then pcsx2-bin else pcsx2-src;

I think this reflects the state of things very well 👌 and look forward to the necessary changes for this in this PR 🙂

In Nixpkgs we prefer source-based.

That makes sense, after all reproducibility is an important aspect of Nix and nixpkgs.

Thanks for the explanation of green aliases, that's helpful to know.

matteo-pacini

LGTM - I'm happy with pcsx2-bin for Darwin, as it explicitly tells me it's a binary distribution.

Let's "remove" the binary-only, MacOS-only package from this expression, because it should be maintained by MacOS maintainers. Besides, no other modification will be made right now, just a merge between files.

- lacks runHooks on installPhase - remove nested with

- Gather all the sources in a same expression under sources.nix - Doc-comment and rename the patch - strictDeps is set as true - Why extra-cmake-modules does not work in nativeBuildInputs?? - Add myself as maintainer

This is a repack of MacOS-only precompiled package from upstream. Basically it is a migration of the previous Darwin-only package for pcsx2. By request, matteo-pacini is set as the sole maintainer of this package.

superherointj · 2024-07-11T01:13:47Z

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 325562 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

pcsx2

superherointj · 2024-07-11T01:17:53Z

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 325562 run on aarch64-darwin 1

AndersonTorres marked this pull request as ready for review July 8, 2024 15:15

AndersonTorres force-pushed the pcsx2 branch from c4eae18 to 07240c6 Compare July 8, 2024 15:16

AndersonTorres requested a review from afh July 8, 2024 15:21

superherointj reviewed Jul 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/package.nix Show resolved Hide resolved

superherointj reviewed Jul 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/package.nix Show resolved Hide resolved

superherointj reviewed Jul 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2/package.nix Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

AndersonTorres marked this pull request as draft July 8, 2024 15:29

matteo-pacini reviewed Jul 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

pkgs/by-name/pc/pcsx2-bin/package.nix Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

afh mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2024

snowsql: Add support for darwin platforms #320328

Open

13 tasks

AndersonTorres force-pushed the pcsx2 branch from 07240c6 to 44dae12 Compare July 10, 2024 03:44

AndersonTorres requested review from matteo-pacini and superherointj July 10, 2024 03:47

ofborg bot added 8.has: clean-up 8.has: package (new) labels Jul 10, 2024

ofborg bot requested review from GovanifY and hrdinka July 10, 2024 04:23

ofborg bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1 labels Jul 10, 2024

AndersonTorres marked this pull request as ready for review July 10, 2024 13:35

matteo-pacini approved these changes Jul 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

AndersonTorres force-pushed the pcsx2 branch from 44dae12 to 1d5bb83 Compare July 10, 2024 22:07

ofborg bot requested a review from matteo-pacini July 11, 2024 00:04

AndersonTorres force-pushed the pcsx2 branch from 1d5bb83 to 4f61edf Compare July 11, 2024 00:40

AndersonTorres added 4 commits July 10, 2024 22:01

pcsx2: "remove" macos binary package

9c6d94f

Let's "remove" the binary-only, MacOS-only package from this expression, because it should be maintained by MacOS maintainers. Besides, no other modification will be made right now, just a merge between files.

pcsx2: fix expression

eb7ef34

- lacks runHooks on installPhase - remove nested with

pcsx2: big rewrite

f277070

- Gather all the sources in a same expression under sources.nix - Doc-comment and rename the patch - strictDeps is set as true - Why extra-cmake-modules does not work in nativeBuildInputs?? - Add myself as maintainer

pcsx2-bin: "init" at 1.7.5919

a47fc28

This is a repack of MacOS-only precompiled package from upstream. Basically it is a migration of the previous Darwin-only package for pcsx2. By request, matteo-pacini is set as the sole maintainer of this package.

AndersonTorres force-pushed the pcsx2 branch from 4f61edf to a47fc28 Compare July 11, 2024 01:04

superherointj approved these changes Jul 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

superherointj merged commit 7b3c572 into NixOS:master Jul 11, 2024
8 of 9 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

pcsx2: rework #325562

pcsx2: rework #325562

AndersonTorres commented Jul 8, 2024

matteo-pacini commented Jul 8, 2024

superherointj Jul 8, 2024

AndersonTorres commented Jul 8, 2024

afh commented Jul 8, 2024

superherointj commented Jul 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

AndersonTorres commented Jul 9, 2024

AndersonTorres commented Jul 10, 2024

afh commented Jul 10, 2024

AndersonTorres commented Jul 10, 2024

afh commented Jul 10, 2024

matteo-pacini left a comment

superherointj commented Jul 11, 2024

superherointj commented Jul 11, 2024

	sha256 = "sha256-WiwnP5yoBy8bRLUPuCZ7z4nhIzrY8P29KS5ZjErM/A4=";
	hash = "sha256-WiwnP5yoBy8bRLUPuCZ7z4nhIzrY8P29KS5ZjErM/A4=";

pcsx2: rework #325562

pcsx2: rework #325562

Conversation

AndersonTorres commented Jul 8, 2024

Description of changes

Things done

matteo-pacini commented Jul 8, 2024

superherointj Jul 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AndersonTorres commented Jul 8, 2024

afh commented Jul 8, 2024

superherointj commented Jul 8, 2024 • edited Loading

AndersonTorres commented Jul 9, 2024

AndersonTorres commented Jul 10, 2024

afh commented Jul 10, 2024

AndersonTorres commented Jul 10, 2024

afh commented Jul 10, 2024

matteo-pacini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

superherointj commented Jul 11, 2024

superherointj commented Jul 11, 2024

superherointj commented Jul 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading