This patch fixes #16614 and #16741.
The first issue was caused by the fact that both `/share` and
`/share/fish/vendor_completions.d` end in the `pathsToLink`. The
`pkgs/build-support/buildenv/builder.pl` creates `/share`, then links
`/share/fish` under `/share` and then tries to create the directory
`/share/fish/vendor_completions.d` and fails because it already exists.
The simplest way to reproduce the issue is to build the next Nix
expression:
```nix
let pkgs = import <nixpkgs> { };
in pkgs.buildEnv {
name = "buildenv-issue";
paths = [
pkgs.fish
pkgs.vim
];
pathsToLink = [
"/share"
"/share/fish/vendor_completions.d"
];
}
```
The second issue is more critical and was caused by the fact findFiles
doesn't recurse deep enough. It stops at first unique directory for the
package (e.g., "/share" or even "/") and later the scripts decides it
shouldn't link it as it doesn't match pathsToLink (e.g., "/share/fish"),
so the result is empty.
The test:
```nix
let pkgs = import <nixpkgs> { };
in pkgs.buildEnv {
name = "buildenv-issue";
paths = [
pkgs.fish
pkgs.vim
];
pathsToLink = [
"/share/fish/functions"
];
}
```
or
```nix
let pkgs = import <nixpkgs> { };
in pkgs.buildEnv {
name = "buildenv-issue";
paths = [
pkgs.vim
];
pathsToLink = [
"/share"
];
}
```
Regression introduced by 4529ed1259.
I've missed this in #5096, not because of a messed up rebase as I have
guessed from a comment on #12635 but missed this in the first place.
The testing I did while working on the pull request weren't exhaustive
enough to cover this, because I haven't tested with packages that use
the propagatedUserEnvPkgs attribute.
In order to make the test a bit more exhaustive this time, let's test it
using:
nix-build -E 'with import ./. {}; buildEnv {
name = "testenv";
paths = [
pkgs.hello pkgs.binutils pkgs.libsoup pkgs.gnome3.yelp
pkgs.gnome3.totem
];
}'
And with this commit the errors no longer show up and the environment is
built correctly.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Fixes: #12635
Checking file contents is redundant in this case, because we will go
ahead anyway, regardless of whether the content is the same.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Originally wanted to include ignoreCollisions in cups-progs, but I think
it's better if we use ignoreCollisions only if there are _real_
collisions between files with different contents.
Of course, we also check whether the file permissions match, so you get
a collision if contents are the same but the permissions are different.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
