|
| 1 | +--- |
| 2 | +feature: common-interface-package-sets |
| 3 | +start-date: 2020-12-19 |
| 4 | +author: Frederik Rietdijk (@FRidh) |
| 5 | +co-authors: |
| 6 | +related-issues: |
| 7 | +--- |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +# Summary |
| 10 | +[summary]: #summary |
| 11 | + |
| 12 | +The Nixpkgs package set consists of a large amount of packages of which a |
| 13 | +significant amount of grouped into sub package sets. This RFC recommends a |
| 14 | +common interface for these package sets. |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +# Motivation |
| 17 | +[motivation]: #motivation |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +The Nixpkgs package set consists of a large amount of packages of which a |
| 20 | +significant amount of grouped into sub package sets. Sets exist for various |
| 21 | +languages, frameworks and plugins. |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +They are typically grouped together for one of the following two reasons: |
| 24 | +- clarity, e.g. because they're written in the same language or framework; |
| 25 | +- necessity, e.g. for compatibility reasons. |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +Over time different methods for defining package sets were created. Currently |
| 28 | +multiple methods are in use in Nixpkgs and pull requests are opened to modify |
| 29 | +sub package sets interfaces from one kind to another. Not only is this confusing |
| 30 | +for users but it also causes trouble; in some cases overriding of derivations |
| 31 | +inside a set is not possible or cross-compilation is broken. |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +This RFC thus aims to unify the package sets to a common interface for the |
| 34 | +following reasons: |
| 35 | +- simplify usage of package sets and reduce confusion surrounding them; |
| 36 | +- single approach for dealing with overrides; |
| 37 | +- handle variants of a package set; |
| 38 | +- ensure cross-compilation works. |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +Often one also wants to build an environment with an interpreter or main program |
| 41 | +and some additional packages or plugins. This RFC will therefore also recommend |
| 42 | +a function each package set should offer for doing so, when appliceable that is. |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +## Related issues |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | +TODO: refer to these issues in correct place. |
| 47 | + |
| 48 | +- Common override interface derivations https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/67 |
| 49 | +- Make PHP packages overrideable https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/107044 |
| 50 | +- Change in emacs interface https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/107152 |
| 51 | +- Python package set is not overrideable |
| 52 | + https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/44426 |
| 53 | +- Support `overrideScope'` in Python package set |
| 54 | + https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/105374 |
| 55 | +- Common `overrideArgs` for sub package sets |
| 56 | + https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/46842. May be resolved using |
| 57 | + `overrideAuto` in https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/67. |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +# Detailed design |
| 60 | +[design]: #detailed-design |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | +We will now look in more detail at what a common interface should offer. |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +## Attribute name of the package set: `fooPackages` versus `foo.pkgs` |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +Two different interfaces are common in Nixpkgs when referring to package sets: |
| 67 | +- `fooPackages` |
| 68 | +- `foo.pkgs` |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +TODO which one to pick? |
| 71 | +## Variants |
| 72 | +Often multiple variants of a package set need to be created. E.g., in case of |
| 73 | +emacs or Python there are different versions of the program and each of them |
| 74 | +should have their own package set. For this reason it is important that one can |
| 75 | +easily create a new variant |
| 76 | + |
| 77 | +```nix |
| 78 | +fooPackagesFor = foo: import ./foo-packages.nix { ... }; |
| 79 | +fooPackages_3_6 = fooPackagesFor foo_3_6; |
| 80 | +``` |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +## Set overriding |
| 83 | +It should be possible to override packages in a sub package set and have the |
| 84 | +other packages in the set take that override into account. To that end, a scope |
| 85 | +is created |
| 86 | + |
| 87 | +```nix |
| 88 | +lib.makeScope pkgs.newScope (self: with self; { |
| 89 | + ... |
| 90 | +} |
| 91 | +``` |
| 92 | + |
| 93 | +that can be overridden using `overrideScope'` |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | +```nix |
| 96 | +fooPackages_3_6.overrideScope' overrides; |
| 97 | +``` |
| 98 | + |
| 99 | +where `overrides` is of the form |
| 100 | + |
| 101 | +```nix |
| 102 | +(final: previous: { ... }) |
| 103 | +``` |
| 104 | + |
| 105 | +In case one uses overlays with Nixpkgs, one could now make the overrides |
| 106 | +composible using |
| 107 | + |
| 108 | +```nix |
| 109 | +fooPackages_3_6 = fooPackages_3_6.overrideScope' overrides; |
| 110 | +``` |
| 111 | + |
| 112 | +## Package overriding |
| 113 | + |
| 114 | +Now that it is possible to override a set, a common interface to overriding the |
| 115 | +packages inside the set is needed as well. This is treated in [RFC |
| 116 | +67](https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/67). |
| 117 | + |
| 118 | +## Cross-compilation |
| 119 | + |
| 120 | +For cross-compilation it is important that `callPackage` in the sub package set |
| 121 | +has access to the spliced versions of the sub package set. Until recently, there |
| 122 | +were no spliced sub package sets in Nixpkgs, but support was added for Python |
| 123 | +utilizing the `makeScopeWithSplicing` function. There is [room for |
| 124 | +improvement](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/105374). |
| 125 | + |
| 126 | +An important aspect for making this work is that, when constructing the package |
| 127 | +set, it needs to know its own top-level attribute. |
| 128 | + |
| 129 | +... |
| 130 | + |
| 131 | + |
| 132 | +To support nested package sets, the full attribute path is needed, including |
| 133 | +dots. |
| 134 | + |
| 135 | +```nix |
| 136 | +`fooPackages_3_6.subFooPackages_2_5` |
| 137 | +``` |
| 138 | + |
| 139 | +## Single function for creating a package set |
| 140 | + |
| 141 | +To ease the creation of a package set, a single function is proposed for |
| 142 | +creating a set given a main program and an attribute name. |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | + |
| 145 | +```nix |
| 146 | +makePackageSet = ... |
| 147 | +``` |
| 148 | + |
| 149 | +## Composing an environment |
| 150 | + |
| 151 | +Thus far we considered building a package set and overriding it. Somewhat |
| 152 | +orthogonal yet still commonly needed, is a method to compose an environment of |
| 153 | +packages inside the package set. |
| 154 | + |
| 155 | +Starting with Haskell and later adopted by other package sets is a |
| 156 | +`withPackages(ps: [...])` function that allows you to compose an environment with chosen |
| 157 | +packages from the set. |
| 158 | + |
| 159 | +This RFC recommends each package set should have such a function, in case it is |
| 160 | +appliceable. An example of where it would not make sense to include such a |
| 161 | +function is in case of a [Qt package |
| 162 | +set](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/102168) because you would not be |
| 163 | +interested in having a Qt with libraries during runtime and nothing else. |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | +Haskell introduced the function as part of its package set, that is, one uses |
| 166 | +`haskellPackages.ghcWithPackages (ps: [...]). Some time later Python added such |
| 167 | +function, but as part of the interpreter `python3.withPackages(ps: [...])`. |
| 168 | +Since then, many other sets also added `withPackages` as part of the |
| 169 | +interpreter or main program. |
| 170 | + |
| 171 | +### `fooPackages` versus `foo.pkgs` again... |
| 172 | + |
| 173 | +TODO |
| 174 | + |
| 175 | +Unfortunately, having `withPackages` as part of the main program makes it |
| 176 | +somewhat more difficult to use it when overrides are needed as well. One would have to write |
| 177 | + |
| 178 | +```nix |
| 179 | +(foo_3_6.pkgs.overrideScope' overrides).foo.withPackages(ps: [...]) |
| 180 | +``` |
| 181 | +Indeed, the `withPackages` of the main program inside the sub set needs to be used. Using |
| 182 | + |
| 183 | +TODO the actual recommendation |
| 184 | + |
| 185 | +# Examples and Interactions |
| 186 | + |
| 187 | + |
| 188 | +# Drawbacks |
| 189 | +[drawbacks]: #drawbacks |
| 190 | + |
| 191 | + |
| 192 | + |
| 193 | +# Alternatives |
| 194 | +[alternatives]: #alternatives |
| 195 | + |
| 196 | +# Future work |
| 197 | +[future]: #future-work |
| 198 | + |
| 199 | +- Document the recommended interface in the Nixpkgs manual. |
| 200 | +- Adopt the recommended interface in existing package sets in Nixpkgs. |
| 201 | +- Encourage tools that create package sets, e.g. from lock files, to also adopt |
| 202 | + this interface. |
0 commit comments