See https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/437208#issuecomment-3288623669
Depends on https://github.com/NixOS/org/pull/172
As documented below, the idea is to essentially group all changes
rebuilding all VM tests with kernel updates and merge them together into
`master` whenever the Linux kernels get updated.
This documents the workflow of updates in the nixpkgs manual. While at
it, I removed the README from the packages because
* it's horribly outdated
* I didn't even know it exists which confirms that its discoverability
was very poor
and added the relevant portions into the nixpkgs manual as well.
(cherry picked from commit 9f95c2ace2)
This documents:
* The existence of the `lhapdf` package (not particularly important)
* The existence of the `lhapdf.pdf_sets` attrset (important)
* The setup hook used in all of the entries in `lhapdf.pdf_sets`
(slightly important)
Part of #341479.
This documents:
* The `geant4.data` attrset introduced in #39514
* The setup hook for geant4
* The setup hook for the geant4.data packages
I also added a brief description of what Geant4 is.
Part of #341479
This commit introduces two new properties:
`enable` and `type`, to replace the `enabled` property.
`enable` has the same meaning as is common across nixpkgs.
`type` has the same meaning as the existing `enabled` property.
`enabled` property is now deprecated and will be removed in a future release.
Fixes#180654
linuxManualConfig involves more boilerplate to change the kernel. Use
the wrapper linuxPackages_custom which is wrapper that takes an
attribute sets and calls linuxManualConfig approrpriately.
This is much easier for beginners to use instead of linuxManualConfig
helper.
Point to linuxManualConfig for further customizations.
Per RFC 9110, [section 8.8.1][1], different representations of the same
resource should have different Etags:
> A strong validator is unique across all versions of all
> representations associated with a particular resource over time.
> However, there is no implication of uniqueness across representations
> of different resources (i.e., the same strong validator might be in
> use for representations of multiple resources at the same time and
> does not imply that those representations are equivalent)
When serving statically compressed files (ie, when there is an existing
corresponding .gz/.br/etc. file on disk), Nginx sends the Etag marked
as strong. These tags should be different for each compressed format
(as shown in an explicit example in section [8.8.3.3][2] of the RFC).
Upstream Etags are composed of the file modification timestamp and
content length, and the latter generally changes between these
representations.
Previous implementation of Nix-specific Etags for things served from
store used the store hash. This is fine to share between different
files, but it becomes a problem for statically compressed versions of
the same file, as it means Nginx was serving different representations
of the same resource with the same Etag, marked as strong.
This patch addresses this by imitating the upstream Nginx behavior, and
appending the value of content length to the store hash.
[1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#name-validator-fields
[2]:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#name-example-entity-tags-varying
The Nixpkgs documentation on the linux kernel builders focused on
using and extending kernels that were already packaged, but never
mentioned that it's possible to also build a kernel almost "from
scratch".
The NixOS documentation went a bit deeper on manual linux kernel
configs, but that information wasn't particularly NixOS-specific.
This commit consolidates the information related to building the
kernel on Nixpkgs's documentation, while keeping any additional
NixOS-specific information on NixOS's documentation.
An additional README.md was created for contributor-facing
documentation.
While the word 'simply' is usually added to encourage readers, it often has the
opposite effect and may even appear condescending, especially when the reader
runs into trouble trying to apply the suggestions from the documentation. It is
almost always an improvement to simply drop the word from the sentence.
(there are more possible improvements like this, we can apply those in separate
PRs)
