unbound: Add mingw32 support

[seanybaggins]

Description of changes

Added mingw32 hostPlatfrom build support.

Things done

Needed for #274274

• 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:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• 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/)
• 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 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.

[ajs124]

can't this use lib.meta.availableOn? iirc that's the preferred pattern.

[seanybaggins]

can't this use lib.meta.availableOn? iirc that's the preferred pattern.

Can you link to an example?

[seanybaggins]

can't this use lib.meta.availableOn? iirc that's the preferred pattern.

Okay found an example. If you are asking about the withMakeWrapper option, I think the answer is no.

nix-repl> lib.meta.availableOn pkgsCross.mingw32.stdenv.hostPlatform pkgsCross.mingw32.makeWrapper
true

I think this response should be false. makeWrapper does not work when you try to target mingw. This is because bash is not a supported target for mingw32.

[seanybaggins]

If I have addressed the comments in the PR, can this get merged? If not what else needs to be done for this to be accepted?

[seanybaggins]

Did this get pushed to staging? Should I close this PR?

[wegank]

No, this isn't in staging.

[seanybaggins]

I got confused. I wasn't aware that you were able to do a force push of a branch that existed in my fork. Thanks for setting me straight.

[Ericson2314]

This can be a separate PR to avoid staging, but someone should clean up this file using lib.{with,enable}Feature{,As}.