being too specific about it requires more maintenance (or otherwise
produced more confusion and churn), since these points of contact change
over time.
Previously the MANPATH was set even if MANPATH was empty beforehand
which resulted in a MANPATH of only ~/.nix-profile/share/man which
omitted the default man page directory (commonly /opt/local/share/man)
from man page results.
Older versions of Fish (such as those bundled with Ubuntu LTS 22.04) do
not support return outside of functions. We need to use the equivalent
exit instead.
Before this patch, installing Nix using the Fish shell did not
work because Fish wasn't configured to add Nix to the PATH. Some
options in #1512 offered workarounds, but they typically involve
extra plugins or packages.
This patch adds native, out-of-the-box support for the Fish shell.
Note that Fish supports a `conf.d` directory, which is intended
for exactly use cases like this: software projects distributing
shell snippets. This patch takes advantage of it. The installer
doesn't append any Nix loader behavior to any Fish config file.
Because of that, the uninstall process is smooth and a reinstall
obliterates the existing nix.fish files that we place instead of
bothering the user with a backup / manual removal.
Both single-user and multi-user cases are covered. It has been
tested on Ubuntu, and a Mac with MacPorts, homebrew, and the
Fish installer pkg.
Closes#1512
Co-authored-by: Graham Christensen <graham@grahamc.com>
A [recent-ish change](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/6676) logs a warning when a potentially counterintuitive situation happens.
This now causes the multi-user installer to [emit a warning](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/189043) when it's doing
the "seed the Nix database" step via a low-level `nix-store --load-db` invocation.
`nix-store` functionality implementations don't actually use profiles or channels or homedir as far as i can tell. So why are we
hitting this code at all?
Well, the current command approach for functionality here builds a [fat `nix` binary](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/master/src/nix/local.mk#L23-L26) which has _all_ the functionality of
previous individual binaries (nix-env, nix-store, etc) bundled in, then [uses the invocation name](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/master/src/nix/main.cc#L274-L277) to select the
set of commands to expose. `nix` itself has this behavior, even when just trying to parse the (sub)command and arguments:
```
dave @ davembp2
$ nix
error: no subcommand specified
Try 'nix --help' for more information.
dave @ davembp2
$ sudo nix
warning: $HOME ('/Users/dave') is not owned by you, falling back to the one defined in the 'passwd' file
error: no subcommand specified
Try 'nix --help' for more information.
dave @ davembp2
$ HOME=~root sudo nix
error: no subcommand specified
Try 'nix --help' for more information.
```
This behavior can also be seen pretty easily with an arbitrary `nix-store` invocation:
```
dave @ davembp2
$ nix-store --realize
dave @ davembp2
$ sudo nix-store --realize # what installer is doing now
warning: $HOME ('/Users/dave') is not owned by you, falling back to the one defined in the 'passwd' file
dave @ davembp2
$ sudo HOME=~root nix-store --realize # what this PR effectively does
dave @ davembp2
$
```
User on Matrix reported install problems which presented as
"vifs:editing error" which we traced back to vim griping about an
existing swap file. When opened interactively, it did this:
E325: ATTENTION
Found a swap file by the name "/etc/.fstab.swp"
owned by: root dated: Sön Apr 24 16:54:10 2022
file name: /private/etc/fstab
modified: YES
user name: root host name: MBP.local
process ID: 1698
While opening file "/etc/fstab"
dated: Sön Apr 24 16:56:27 2022
NEWER than swap file!
...
On Linux a user can go through all the way through the multi-user install
and find out at the end that they now have to manually configure their
init system to launch the nix daemon.
I suspect that for a significant number of users this is not
what they wanted. They might prefer a single-user install.
Now they have to manually uninstall nix before they can
go through the single-user install.
This introduces a confirmation dialog before the install
in that specific situation to make sure that they want to proceed.
See also: https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/4999#issuecomment-1064188080
This closes#4999 but rejecting it and closing that issue anyways
would also be valid.
While `create_directories()` from install-multi-user.sh seems to already
create parts of the directory structure, it's marked as deprecated, and
it won't hurt also copying over the tmpfiles config and have it execute
once.
Same as 1fd127a068, but applied to a
code path (volume_pass_works -> verify_volume_pass) that the reporting
user didn't hit and wasn't able to trigger manually. I am not certain
but I suspect it will be easier to add prophylactically than to debug
if its absence causes trouble some day.
While trying to figure out how `nix-env`/`nix profile` work I had a hard
time understand how man pages were being installed.
Took me quite some time to figure this out, thought it might be useful
to others too!
Fixes#6122, which reports a problem with trying to run the installer
under another user (probably: user is not the disk "owner" and thus
can't mount the volume).
The script is trying to find chown in a cross-platform-like
way, but there's some sort of deficiency in `command -p` in
the default macOS bash 3.2. It looks like it will just use
whatever PATH is already set, instead of the "default" path.
This attempts to hard-set a PATH via `getconf PATH`. It will
just set an empty PATH if that fails for some reason. A
properly-functioning `command -p` should not care what we
set the PATH to here one way or the other.
Hopefully fixes#5768.
Same purpose as de9efa3b79af7886fcf2a67b6ce97d4f96a57421
For some unclear reason, we get occasional reports from people who do
not have /usr/sbin on their PATH that the installer fails. It's a
standard part of the PATH, so I have no clue what they're doing to
remove it--but it's also fairly cheap to avoid.
Add a regular github action that will check the status of the latest
hydra evaluation.
Things aren’t ideal right now because this job will only notify “the
user who last modified the cron syntax in the workflow file” (so myself
atm). But at least that’ll give a notification for failing hydra jobs
