Fix follow path checking at depths greater than 2 #8819
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
with-tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I cherry-picked the test onto current master and it fails indeed with error: input 'B/D' follows a non-existent input 'B/C/D'. I then tested the full branch locally and it does indeed fix the test.
Code change itself is trivial, this can be merged.
If you want, you can also add a bullet to rl-next.md so the fix shows up in the next release notes, but it's not a requirement :)
Sure - I've added a small note. |
We need to recurse into the input tree to handle follows paths that trarverse multiple inputs that may or may not be follow paths themselves.
RealityAnomaly
force-pushed
the
fix/deep-follow-paths
branch
from
7396f74
to
37a509c
Compare
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
The example I've been using: #5790 (comment) |
Co-authored-by: Alex Ameen <alex.ameen.tx@gmail.com>
|
The test on macos is failing only due to a flaky test. Could someone with CI access retrigger it? |
Note. This PR is solving a different problem than what I mentioned above. |
Motivation
Currently, you can't have follows paths with depths greater than 2 - you get an error along the lines of
error: input 'B/D' follows a non-existent input 'B/C/D'.Context
We need to recurse into the input tree to handle follows paths that trarverse multiple inputs that may or may not be follow paths themselves. I've added tests for the problem.
Checklist for maintainers
Maintainers: tick if completed or explain if not relevant
tests/**.shsrc/*/teststests/nixos/*Priorities
Add 👍 to pull requests you find important.