-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.8k
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
rocwmma: init at 0.8-5.3.3 #202685
rocwmma: init at 0.8-5.3.3 #202685
Conversation
a27b610
to
1837627
Compare
Moved |
, gtest ? null | ||
, rocblas ? null | ||
, texlive ? null | ||
, doxygen ? null | ||
, sphinx ? null | ||
, python3Packages ? null | ||
, buildTests ? false | ||
, buildSamples ? false | ||
, buildDocs ? false | ||
, gpuTargets ? null # gpuTargets = [ "gfx908:xnack-" "gfx90a:xnack-" "gfx90a:xnack+" ... ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There should not be added new instances where packages are being overwritten to null to disable features. This is an anti pattern and is totally not required here including the asserts below. This is a legacy artifact from before callPackage when import was still used.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was under the impression it was to not include those packages and make the closure smaller.
If it's not, I'll change it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
gpuTargets
is however null
for a different reason.
Is there a reason to change it?
Would it be better to change it to something like [ ]
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was under the impression it was to not include those packages and make the closure smaller.
It is enough to use lib.optional(s) or if else then for that.
Would it be better to change it to something like
[ ]
?
That depends on how it should be handled. If only the entries in the list matter than having it by default an empty list is better defined. If there is a difference between null and empty list then it maybe shouldn't be changed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is no discernible difference, so it should be fine.
Description of changes
Tracking: #197885
Things done
sandbox = true
set innix.conf
? (See Nix manual)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD"
. Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/
)nixos/doc/manual/md-to-db.sh
to update generated release notes