insomnia: add aarch64-darwin build, sandbox builds

[mikansoro]

Insomnia has been supported on apple silicon since 2022, so nixpkgs should support it too.

Switch to using undmg to unpack the source .dmg file instead of mounting it, so sandboxed builds complete successfully on macos.

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:
  • 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/)
• 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.

[DataHearth]

Great, thank you! I can't test it, can you post the results of nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review pr 383533" please? Thanks! I'll post the result for amd64 Linux today 👍.

[mikansoro]

Result of nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review pr 383533"

{
    "blacklisted": [],
    "broken": [],
    "built": [],
    "extra-nixpkgs-config": null,
    "failed": [],
    "non-existent": [],
    "pr": 383533,
    "system": "aarch64-darwin",
    "tests": []
}

@DataHearth I'm not too familiar with nixpkgs-review, should there be no builds listed when running against the PR? Running nixpkgs-review rev HEAD against my branch notes insomnia as built:

{
    "blacklisted": [],
    "broken": [],
    "built": [
        "insomnia"
    ],
    "extra-nixpkgs-config": null,
    "failed": [],
    "non-existent": [],
    "pr": null,
    "system": "aarch64-darwin",
    "tests": []
}

[DataHearth]

Result of nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review pr 383533"

{
    "blacklisted": [],
    "broken": [],
    "built": [],
    "extra-nixpkgs-config": null,
    "failed": [],
    "non-existent": [],
    "pr": 383533,
    "system": "aarch64-darwin",
    "tests": []
}

@DataHearth I'm not too familiar with nixpkgs-review, should there be no builds listed when running against the PR? Running nixpkgs-review rev HEAD against my branch notes insomnia as built:

{
    "blacklisted": [],
    "broken": [],
    "built": [
        "insomnia"
    ],
    "extra-nixpkgs-config": null,
    "failed": [],
    "non-existent": [],
    "pr": null,
    "system": "aarch64-darwin",
    "tests": []
}

Not really. I also get this behaviour sometimes. Mostly with old versions of nixpkgs-review. You can check which channel is being used and/or update it. But hey, I trust you, if you built it locally with nixpkgs-review rev HEAD, great! LGTM!

[DataHearth]

@mikansoro you could become a maintainer if you're using often on this arch. This would help a lot 😄 !

[mikansoro]

I'm not opposed to being added, but I don't use it regularly. Some folk at $work do and we're slowly adopting nix for devs. Figured I'd put in a PR if it wasn't too much work to build 😄.

If you'd like to have me on as a tester for apple silicon anyway though, then sure 🙂

[mikansoro]

Mostly with old versions of nixpkgs-review

Aha, that was it. Thanks! Turns out I'd never updated my mac from 24.05 when I updated the rest of my machines. oops.

--------- Report for 'aarch64-darwin' ---------
1 package built:
insomnia

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 383533

---

aarch64-darwin

✅ 1 package built:

• insomnia