fix: treefmt on nixos-unstable #398
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Is there any need to switch to the new packages, while the old is still in nixpkgs? My reasoning is that once the new is a full and equal replacement, the old one will be removed and this code will just continue to wirk fine. |
|
With current This is especially problematic for the |
|
Ok, then let's switch to |
|
plan to merge this? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
nixpkgs@dcb250a introduced some changes to the
treefmtpackage:treefmtpackage istreefmt v2aka the go version)treefmt1package throws an eval errorresulting in broken
std devensas they trigger the eval error fortreefmt1.std@febf2ee explicitly selects the discontinued rust implementation due to unfixed bugs in 24.11 for treefmt < 2.1.1.
The
stdrepo still uses the23.11nixpkgs release.@blaggacao I'm not sure what the best path forward is for this change to not break backwards compatibility, please advise.
Until this is sorted I'll leave this PR as draft for further discussion.