Skip to content

fontforge: remove unused uthash dependency #422906

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 6, 2025

Conversation

LordGrimmauld
Copy link
Contributor

Upstream removed the uthash dependency in 2019 [1]. It us unnecessary to add this dependency in nixpkgs, and just unnecessarily bloats closure size.

Output stayed the same apart from nix store hashes, checked using diffoscope.

[1] fontforge/fontforge@1ec6231

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:
  • 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/)
  • Nixpkgs 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 25.05 Nixpkgs Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • NixOS 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 25.05 NixOS Release notes)
    • (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, pkgs/README.md, maintainers/README.md and other contributing documentation in corresponding paths.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@LordGrimmauld LordGrimmauld added 6.topic: closure size The final size of a derivation, including its dependencies 8.has: clean-up This PR removes packages or removes other cruft labels Jul 6, 2025
@nix-owners nix-owners bot requested review from philiptaron and UlyssesZh July 6, 2025 10:32
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-darwin: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and must target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches. labels Jul 6, 2025
@philiptaron
Copy link
Contributor

Needs to target staging; LGTM.

Upstream removed the uthash dependency in 2019 [1].
It us unnecessary to add this dependency in nixpkgs,
and just unnecessarily bloats closure size.

[1] fontforge/fontforge@1ec6231
@LordGrimmauld LordGrimmauld changed the base branch from master to staging July 6, 2025 12:47
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot closed this Jul 6, 2025
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot reopened this Jul 6, 2025
@LordGrimmauld
Copy link
Contributor Author

done

@ofborg ofborg bot added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jul 6, 2025
@philiptaron
Copy link
Contributor

@wolfgangwalther take a look at this ofBorg label addition!

@ofborg ofborg bot removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jul 6, 2025
@wolfgangwalther
Copy link
Contributor

Odd. I knew that ofborg would remove the merge conflict label, but not that it would add it, too. And wrongly so. I guess we can remove this code from ofborg now, WDYT?

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages. labels Jul 6, 2025
@LordGrimmauld
Copy link
Contributor Author

LordGrimmauld commented Jul 6, 2025

I suspect i know what happened.

  • I pushed the rebase to staging (without setting the PR to draft)
  • ofborg started running (on the rebased PR targetting master still)
  • i basically instantly switched the PR target
  • CI closed/reopened, restarting ofborg
  • ofborg finished and tagged merge conflict
  • second ofborg invocation removed merge conflict tag

@philiptaron
Copy link
Contributor

I guess we can remove this code from ofborg now, WDYT?

That was my takeaway. Labeling is now the exclusive purview of the CI JavaScript GitHubScript.

@philiptaron philiptaron merged commit 1cb33f7 into NixOS:staging Jul 6, 2025
34 of 42 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: closure size The final size of a derivation, including its dependencies 8.has: clean-up This PR removes packages or removes other cruft 10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-darwin: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and must target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches. 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. 12.approved-by: package-maintainer This PR was reviewed and approved by a maintainer listed in any of the changed packages.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants