nix: implement flake by VTimofeenko · Pull Request #1869 · eikek/docspell

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:44:44Z

This commit introduces the ability to install Docspell from a Nix flake. There are no major changes to the logic of the previous modules outside of organizing them in a flake and adding a simple check script.

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:53:44Z

nix/flake/checks/configuration-test.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+{ config, pkgs, ... }:


Diffs from original file (diff {..,checks}/configuration-test.nix)

3d2 < docspell = import ./release.nix; 15d13 < imports = docspell.modules ++ [ ./solr.nix ]; # now handled within the flake when constructing checks 26,36d23 < nixpkgs = { < config = { < packageoverrides = pkgs: < let < callpackage = pkgs.lib.callpackagewith(custom // pkgs); < custom = { < docspell = callpackage docspell.currentpkg {}; < }; < in custom; < }; < }; # no longer necessary, the packages are available in flake overlay output 60c47,48 < { enabled = true; --- > { > enabled = true; 76c64,65 < [ pkgs.docspell.server --- > [ > pkgs.docspell.server 91c80 < firewall.allowedtcpports = [7880]; --- > firewall.allowedtcpports = [ 7880 ]; # minor nixpkgs-fmt

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:54:22Z

nix/flake/checks/default.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+{ ... }:


Imports for the flake check happen here

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:55:17Z

nix/flake/checks/solr.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+{ config, pkgs, ... }:


Copied from original into the flake to be self-contained

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:55:48Z

nix/flake/checks/testScript.py

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+with subtest("services are up"):


Primitive test script that waits for systemd units inside the test VM

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T19:57:43Z

nix/flake/flake.nix

+      forAllSystems = nixpkgs.lib.genAttrs supportedSystems;
+      nixpkgsFor = forAllSystems (system: import nixpkgs { inherit system; });
+      # Version config
+      cfg = {


Taken from the original pkg.nix, just for the latest version for brevity's sake.

If the original implementation in nix/ is kept - the flake could import this attrset from pkg.nix

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T20:01:09Z

nix/flake/modules/joex.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,1728 @@
+overlay: { config, lib, pkgs, ... }:


Key change: module by itself takes an overlay to later reference the package without a a call to callPackage.

The rest of changes to this file (diff ../module-joex.nix modules/joex.nix) are mostly nixpkgs-fmt.

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T20:02:19Z

nix/flake/modules/server.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,877 @@
+overlay: { config, lib, pkgs, ... }:


Key change: module by itself takes an overlay to later reference the package without a a call to callPackage.

The rest of changes to this file (diff ../module-server.nix modules/server.nix) are mostly nixpkgs-fmt.

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T20:07:00Z

As discussed yesterday in Gitter - opening a PR to add the ability to install Docspell through flakes. I have not included any material changes to the logic that is implemented in nix - I will file those PRs later so that they would be easier to review.

In my environment the flake successfully installs and runs Docspell on an aarch64-linux machine and passes checks on a x86_64-linux machine.

Since some of the diffs are quite long - I have added comments to the first lines to summarize the changes.

Question: should I include the instructions to use flake in the docs?

eikek

Thank you so much! 💯

Big thanks also for the comments, it helped to look through it. I think we can now remove the "old" files right? Just to reduce maintenance burden a little. Maybe an example on how to use it would be nice to add to the readme or docs eventually. wdyt?

Edit: I'm fine with not defining packages for every version. It is easy enough to go some commits back if needed

eikek · 2022-11-29T20:01:56Z

nix/flake/flake.nix

+      };
+
+
+      # nixosModules = {


is this some example or maybe a leftover?

Leftover, will kill this part

VTimofeenko · 2022-11-29T21:34:32Z

You're most welcome :) I have been a user of docspell for probably a couple of years now and glad to be able to give something back.

I think we can now remove the "old" files right? Just to reduce maintenance burden a little.

From technical perspective - yes, old files can be removed.

Maybe an example on how to use it would be nice to add to the readme or docs eventually. wdyt?

Sure, can do.

I'm fine with not defining packages for every version. It is easy enough to go some commits back if needed

One way to tackle this - probably in a future PR - is to:

Implement building from source (also would close For nix, build from source? #652)
Move flake.nix to the root of the project
Replace all references to the package source in the flake to self.

That way a user would be able to add to their inputs something like:

inputs.docspell.url="github:eikek/docspell?ref=0.39.0`;

and nix would take care of the rest.

All in all what I will change in this commit:

Remove the obsolete comment in flake.nix as per discussion
Remove the code in nix/
Merge older tags from pkg.nix into the attrset flake.nix (for now)
Move the flake to nix/
Describe how the flake can be used in website/site/content/docs/install/nix.md

eikek · 2022-11-29T22:32:44Z

Thank you, that is really great! For me it is fine to just go for flakes and remove all other redundant code. By "not defining packages for every version" I merely meant to only define the current version in the nix files as you did it. The huge list of previous versions can be removed in my view (so just as you did).

That way a user would be able to add to their inputs something like:
inputs.docspell.url="github:eikek/docspell?ref=0.39.0`;

Yes that would be nice, of course. I sense some effort here, but I never really built an sbt project via nix. Perhaps good to keep for later :)

I can hit "merge" right now if you want or later, just ping me when you are ok. There is no hurry :)

This commit introduces the ability to install Docspell from a Nix flake. There are no major changes to the logic of the previous modules outside of organizing them in a flake and adding a simple check script.

VTimofeenko · 2022-12-01T05:28:22Z

I have implemented the aforementioned changes

A couple of points:

Documentation mentioned consumedir module - but I could not find a definition for one. Did I miss it? I removed it from doc for now
I have pinned nixpkgs version to nixos-22.11 as it just came out - turns out two packages are currently marked as insecure:
- solr - directly
- wkhtmltopdf - indirectly, since it depends on qtwebengine which is deemed insecure (see here)
I have added them to permitInsecurePackages in tests.

eikek · 2022-12-01T07:30:33Z

Thank you so much!
Regarding

oh right - this has been moved a long time ago into the dsc project :-)
I think that's good to add them to permitted packages - thank you.

VTimofeenko commented Nov 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

nix/flake/checks/default.nix

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@

{ ... }:

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Contributor Author

VTimofeenko Nov 29, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Imports for the flake check happen here

VTimofeenko commented Nov 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

eikek approved these changes Nov 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

nix: implement flake

ae8bd1d

This commit introduces the ability to install Docspell from a Nix flake. There are no major changes to the logic of the previous modules outside of organizing them in a flake and adding a simple check script.

VTimofeenko force-pushed the nix-flake branch from 562c482 to ae8bd1d Compare December 1, 2022 05:24

eikek merged commit 4014196 into eikek:master Dec 1, 2022

VTimofeenko deleted the nix-flake branch December 12, 2022 16:03

eikek added this to the Docspell 0.40.0 milestone Mar 11, 2023

Conversation

VTimofeenko commented Nov 29, 2022

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

VTimofeenko commented Nov 29, 2022

Uh oh!

eikek left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

VTimofeenko commented Nov 29, 2022

Uh oh!

eikek commented Nov 29, 2022

Uh oh!

VTimofeenko commented Dec 1, 2022

Uh oh!

eikek commented Dec 1, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

eikek left a comment •

edited

Loading