rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 #359621

soanvig · 2024-11-27T16:55:01Z

https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.0
https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.1
https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.2
https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.3

Extracted note from 0.2.0:

Breaking: Minimum MacOS version went from El Captain to Big Sur on ARM64 and Catalina on Intel x86.

Things done

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

TornaxO7 · 2024-11-28T11:03:03Z

On linux my system it builds, and tests pass, however for whatever reason the builder exists with 129 status code, and there is no other error in the logs...

This was already raised: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/getting-build-error-from-nix-build-although-theres-no-error/54561/2 by @TornaxO7

Here's what I've found (yet):

It starts to fail when it reached this test:

rio> test sugarloaf/src/font/loader/mod.rs - font::loader::Database::with_face_data (line 397) ... ignored

During the execution of this test, my memory consumption increased non-stop. I assume that the process got killed then afterwards which returned to the exit code 129.

Would be awesome if someone else has got an idea how to fix that because damn... this error is pretty annoying

and the fix would also fix the nix-flake in the repo of rio!

soanvig · 2024-11-28T11:23:11Z

Regarding comment on the forums, I noticed that indeed their nix build failed with this error, but on master new "Nix build" CI work properly. I tried using that commit with no success.

Note, that CI in this PR succeeded - false positive or something is wrong with our machines?

TornaxO7 · 2024-11-28T14:10:42Z

Note, that CI in this PR succeeded - false positive or something is wrong with our machines?

Wait, you're right.

Huh? How?

soanvig · 2024-12-02T09:51:56Z

Latest nixos packages, using unstable, still failing on nix-build -k -A rio

NovaViper · 2024-12-08T06:12:58Z

Just tried it with my flake and also experienced the same error 129 failure. Though unlike @TornaxO7 noted, I didn't have steadily increasing memory usage, it stayed consistent

rio> test context::grid::test::test_single_context_respecting_margin_and_no_quad_creation ... ok
error: builder for '/nix/store/rgj7x2d45zy5hf44nm3rkga1byhrri15-rio-0.2.2.drv' failed with exit code 129;
       last 25 log lines:
       > test event_loop_proxy_send ... ok
       > test window_builder_sync ... ok
       > test window_sync ... ok
       >
       > test result: ok. 4 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.00s
       >
       >      Running unittests src/main.rs (target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/release/deps/rio-a84fdce5a2408e08)
       >
       > running 47 tests
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_different_action ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_identical_mode ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_mode_notmode ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_itself ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_modes ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_notmodes ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_partial_intersection ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_mismatches_notmode ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_mismatches_unrelated ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_trigger_modes ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_trigger_notmodes ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_with_mode_matches_empty_mode ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::binding_without_mode_matches_any_mode ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::bindings_overwrite ... ok
       > test bindings::tests::mods_binding_requires_strict_match ... ok
       > test context::grid::test::test_single_context_respecting_margin_and_no_quad_creation ... ok
       For full logs, run 'nix log /nix/store/rgj7x2d45zy5hf44nm3rkga1byhrri15-rio-0.2.2.drv'.
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/3qbkhb7xpl9b8rjszlrjc4v24v4qhbi2-home-manager-path.drv' failed to build
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/q5lpfpr8snml2jlq8dfbx1d9hvqi775f-home-manager-generation.drv' failed to build
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/a4vb54ydh5ghb6ph03qrjmlfh35hfh26-user-environment.drv' failed to build
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/rz6yfmz1dp9977f5sk56l78mpfkdh6fq-etc.drv' failed to build
error: 1 dependencies of derivation '/nix/store/fddagg7jp7r4601h0si4mpkvq49ws6rm-nixos-system-yoganova-25.05.20241205.d0797a0.drv' failed to build
┏━ 1 Errors:
┃ error: builder for '/nix/store/rgj7x2d45zy5hf44nm3rkga1byhrri15-rio-0.2.2.drv' failed with exit code…
┃        last 25 log lines:
┃        > test event_loop_proxy_send ... ok
┃        > test window_builder_sync ... ok
┃        > test window_sync ... ok
┃        >
┃        > test result: ok. 4 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.0…
┃        >
┃        >      Running unittests src/main.rs (target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/release/deps/rio-a84fdc…
┃        >
┃        > running 47 tests
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_different_action ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_identical_mode ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_mode_notmode ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_itself ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_modes ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_notmodes ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_matches_partial_intersection ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_mismatches_notmode ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_mismatches_unrelated ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_trigger_modes ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_trigger_notmodes ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_with_mode_matches_empty_mode ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::binding_without_mode_matches_any_mode ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::bindings_overwrite ... ok
┃        > test bindings::tests::mods_binding_requires_strict_match ... ok
┃        > test context::grid::test::test_single_context_respecting_margin_and_no_quad_creation ... ok
┃        For full logs, run 'nix log /nix/store/rgj7x2d45zy5hf44nm3rkga1byhrri15-rio-0.2.2.drv'.
┣━ Dependency Graph:
┃                ┌─ ⏸ hm_fontconfigconf.d10hmfonts.conf waiting for 1 ⚠
┃             ┌─ ⏸ home-manager-files
┃          ┌─ ⏸ home-manager-generation
┃       ┌─ ⏸ unit-home-manager-novaviper.service
┃    ┌─ ⏸ system-units
┃    │     ┌─ ⚠ rio-0.2.2 failed with exit code 129 after ⏱ 12m14s in checkPhase
┃    │  ┌─ ⏸ home-manager-path
┃    ├─ ⏸ user-environment
┃ ┌─ ⏸ etc
┃ ⏸ nixos-system-yoganova-25.05.20241205.d0797a0
┣━━━ Builds
┗━ ∑ ⏵ 0 │ ✔ 0 │ ⏸ 9 │ ⚠ Exited after 1 build failures at 00:08:03 after 13m18s
Error:
   0: Command exited with status Exited(1)

Location:
   src/commands.rs:151

Build log
build-fail.txt

Nix info:

❯ nix-info -m
 - system: `"x86_64-linux"`
 - host os: `Linux 6.12.1, NixOS, 25.05 (Warbler), 25.05.20241205.d0797a0`
 - multi-user?: `yes`
 - sandbox: `yes`
 - version: `nix-env (Nix) 2.25.2`
 - nixpkgs: `/nix/store/nr5nl3zwzl02x3rnikjbry3s5xy7bm1d-source`

raphamorim · 2024-12-18T00:49:49Z

I re-enabled the checks on Rio term, I will try to do a bisect of split PR that broke this pipeline.

raphamorim · 2024-12-19T12:13:58Z

Ok, my guess is that after the split PR got merged, I introduced a test that's flaky.

The grid tests have a lot of unsafe calls of libc and if it breaks will not be logged properly because it's ub, and the test will just close.

My guess is that ci have a pointer alignment different than our machines, I will try to figure this out.

jcdickinson · 2024-12-19T18:39:23Z

I got it building on my machine/PR by disabling a subset of the tests, it seems the context::grid tests are somehow to blame. It's the one linked above.

raphamorim · 2024-12-19T19:20:46Z

@jcdickinson disable the grid tests fixed for you? Will give a try but looks everything is connected to the resize fn not working properly in the sandbox

jcdickinson · 2024-12-19T22:05:27Z

@jcdickinson disable the grid tests fixed for you? Will give a try but looks everything is connected to the resize fn not working properly in the sandbox

Yeah, I ran the tests without parallelism plus --nocapture and it consistently crashed on those. Disabling them resulted in a complete build.

raphamorim · 2024-12-20T02:07:45Z

aha, ok. yea i imagine there's something off in the created context on nix "sandbox" i need to investigate how to normalize it

raphamorim · 2024-12-22T01:44:14Z

Ok, took a while sorry about that. Fixed this issue here -> raphamorim/rio#853

soanvig · 2024-12-22T11:49:57Z

Tested with 67e64aeb4216eb4656386ef7cedef5456f0d42ff commit (rev hash: sha256-tZEBk4v9AJQaLVOeWVAgYfHP1m6NS3hIXxXOyNvvlM0=, cargo hash: sha256-HOkaPsHvRGGBDlnVRvMKCJLOrOQKDlaowLveL35JAK0=). Now there is no error.

That being said, let's wait for rio 0.2.3 to include that change, and it will be done

soanvig · 2025-01-14T15:13:29Z

@TornaxO7 @oluceps @otavio
Build works locally with 0.2.3. Please test it by yourself. PR is updated to 0.2.3

SuperSandro2000

Why are there () around the package name?

SuperSandro2000 · 2025-01-14T15:22:57Z

pkgs/by-name/ri/rio/package.nix


  src = fetchFromGitHub {
    owner = "raphamorim";
    repo = "rio";
-    rev = "v${version}";
-    hash = "sha256-10E7tIuix0BGKFbADLhcReRC01FXV/dBivJjfSe/X/c=";
+    rev = "v0.2.3";


Suggested change

rev = "v0.2.3";

rev = "v${version}";

@SuperSandro2000 ah, good spot. I also merged all commits into one without parens around name

soanvig · 2025-01-15T09:10:31Z

Rio 0.2.3 requires Rust 1.84 and that's why the build fails: https://logs.ofborg.org/?key=nixos/nixpkgs.359621&attempt_id=5b3f6784-0ab6-4564-87e2-1c459244839f

SuperSandro2000 · 2025-01-17T21:20:21Z

How about you downgrade to the latest version that works with our rust version? Otherwise we need to wait a bit for 1.84 to be available.

raphamorim · 2025-01-17T22:34:55Z

v0.2.4 released with MSRV back to 1.80.1 https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.4

soanvig · 2025-01-18T00:31:19Z

How about you downgrade to the latest version that works with our rust version? Otherwise we need to wait a bit for 1.84 to be available.

@SuperSandro2000 I cannot. Older versions of Rio 2.x had a bug leading to builds not passing.

@raphamorim splendid. Testing right now

https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.0 https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.1 https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.2 https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.3 https://github.com/raphamorim/rio/releases/tag/v0.2.4

soanvig · 2025-01-18T00:42:17Z

@raphamorim works locally, now let's see how nixpks pipelines feel

NixOSInfra added the 12. first-time contribution This PR is the author's first one; please be gentle! label Nov 27, 2024

ofborg bot requested review from TornaxO7, oluceps and otavio November 28, 2024 10:58

ofborg bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1 labels Nov 28, 2024

raphamorim added a commit to raphamorim/rio that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024

reenable checks on nix build (ref NixOS/nixpkgs#359621)

c5fc36e

TornaxO7 mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2024

rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.2 #366328

Closed

10 tasks

soanvig changed the title ~~(rio): 0.1.17 -> 0.2.2~~ (rio): 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 Jan 14, 2025

github-actions bot removed 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 10.rebuild-linux: 1 labels Jan 14, 2025

SuperSandro2000 requested changes Jan 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

soanvig force-pushed the update-rio-to-0.2.2 branch from 0f7d026 to b664df5 Compare January 14, 2025 15:31

soanvig changed the title ~~(rio): 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3~~ rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 Jan 14, 2025

soanvig requested a review from SuperSandro2000 January 14, 2025 15:33

TornaxO7 approved these changes Jan 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

otavio approved these changes Jan 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

wegank added the 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two reputable people label Jan 14, 2025

soanvig force-pushed the update-rio-to-0.2.2 branch from b664df5 to 178ee76 Compare January 18, 2025 00:41

TornaxO7 approved these changes Jan 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

SuperSandro2000 approved these changes Jan 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

SuperSandro2000 merged commit 26b33b8 into NixOS:master Jan 18, 2025
25 of 27 checks passed

soanvig deleted the update-rio-to-0.2.2 branch January 18, 2025 03:15

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 #359621

rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 #359621

soanvig commented Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

TornaxO7 commented Nov 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

soanvig commented Nov 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

TornaxO7 commented Nov 28, 2024

soanvig commented Dec 2, 2024

NovaViper commented Dec 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

raphamorim commented Dec 18, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 19, 2024

jcdickinson commented Dec 19, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 19, 2024

jcdickinson commented Dec 19, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 20, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 22, 2024

soanvig commented Dec 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

soanvig commented Jan 14, 2025

SuperSandro2000 left a comment

SuperSandro2000 Jan 14, 2025

soanvig Jan 14, 2025

soanvig commented Jan 15, 2025

SuperSandro2000 commented Jan 17, 2025

raphamorim commented Jan 17, 2025

soanvig commented Jan 18, 2025

soanvig commented Jan 18, 2025

rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 #359621

rio: 0.1.17 -> 0.2.3 #359621

Conversation

soanvig commented Nov 27, 2024 • edited Loading

Things done

TornaxO7 commented Nov 28, 2024 • edited Loading

soanvig commented Nov 28, 2024 • edited Loading

TornaxO7 commented Nov 28, 2024

soanvig commented Dec 2, 2024

NovaViper commented Dec 8, 2024 • edited Loading

raphamorim commented Dec 18, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 19, 2024

jcdickinson commented Dec 19, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 19, 2024

jcdickinson commented Dec 19, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 20, 2024

raphamorim commented Dec 22, 2024

soanvig commented Dec 22, 2024 • edited Loading

soanvig commented Jan 14, 2025

SuperSandro2000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SuperSandro2000 Jan 14, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

soanvig Jan 14, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

soanvig commented Jan 15, 2025

SuperSandro2000 commented Jan 17, 2025

raphamorim commented Jan 17, 2025

soanvig commented Jan 18, 2025

soanvig commented Jan 18, 2025

soanvig commented Nov 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

TornaxO7 commented Nov 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

soanvig commented Nov 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

NovaViper commented Dec 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

soanvig commented Dec 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading