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

Restic: add unitConfig option #368234

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jerith666
Copy link
Contributor

as requested in #367359; cc @MatthiasvB @bbigras @i077

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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added 6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` labels Dec 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 labels Dec 26, 2024
Copy link

@ibizaman ibizaman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good although I'd like to test it as I would really like to use this.
I'd like to ask if you don't mind to revert formatting changes. It makes the PR quite hard to read actually.

@jerith666
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd like to ask if you don't mind to revert formatting changes. It makes the PR quite hard to read actually.

I thought that nixpkgs was moving towards enforcing standard formatting for all nix code, so I've been doing that in all my recent PRs.

However, I see that the recent #366941, which also touched these files, did not encounter any complaints (either from automated formatting checks or from human reviewers), so I must have misunderstood where we are in that process.

In any event, since the code change is built on top of the reformatting, it's non-trivial to rebase it & get rid of the formatting. So hopefully you can review the substantive change by just looking at this PR's second commit in isolation?

@ibizaman
Copy link

ibizaman commented Jan 3, 2025

My bad I failed to realize there were two commits. You did the right thing!

@@ -402,6 +413,7 @@ in
EnvironmentFile = backup.environmentFile;
};
}
// lib.optionalAttrs (backup.unitConfig != null) backup.unitConfig
Copy link

@ibizaman ibizaman Jan 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This shouldn't be a // update. The issue here is that it doesn't actually merge the values given above with the ones specified in unitConfig. For example, if I give unitConfig.serviceConfig = {};, it removes all the config given in this module.

I know you can use updateRecursive or mkMerge here but I'm never sure when you can use one or the other.

inherit passwordFile paths;
repository = remoteRepository;
unitConfig = {
documentation = [ "custom-unit-config-was-written" ];
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would add serviceConfig = { something here }; to make sure to catch the issue with the // operator.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants