nixos: remove optional builtins prefixes from prelude functions#447403
Merged
MattSturgeon merged 1 commit intoJan 15, 2026
Conversation
This was referenced Sep 30, 2025
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
10.rebuild-linux: 1-10
13 tasks
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
the
9.needs: reviewer
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
2.status: merge conflict
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
the
9.needs: reviewer
trueNAHO
force-pushed
the
nixos-remove-optional-builtins-prefixes-from-prelude-functions
branch
from
f15a8c0 to
6bc130c
Compare
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
removed
the
2.status: merge conflict
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
12.approvals: 1
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
requested review from
LordGrimmauld,
Ma27,
RaitoBezarius,
emilazy,
flokli,
m1cr0man,
thoughtpolice and
wolfgangwalther
qweered
approved these changes
Nov 16, 2025
qweered
left a comment
qweered
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Skimmed through changes, nothing questionable
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
added
the
2.status: merge conflict
Contributor
Seeing as no one seems to be objecting, I'm happy to re-review and merge once rebased. FYI #480141 is also pulling in the new nixd linting rules into our ci-pinned nixpkgs, although it looks like we'll be disabling them at first to avoid a treewide cleanup. |
Remove optional builtins prefixes from prelude functions by running:
builtins=(
abort
baseNameOf
break
derivation
derivationStrict
dirOf
false
fetchGit
fetchMercurial
fetchTarball
fetchTree
fromTOML
import
isNull
map
null
placeholder
removeAttrs
scopedImport
throw
toString
true
)
fd \
--exclude doc/manual/release-notes \
--type file \
. \
nixos \
--exec-batch sed --in-place --regexp-extended "
s/\<builtins\.($(
printf '%s\n' "${builtins[@]}" |
paste --delimiter '|' --serial -
))\>/\1/g
"
nix fmt
trueNAHO
force-pushed
the
nixos-remove-optional-builtins-prefixes-from-prelude-functions
branch
from
dc9c0ac to
a2ed7e8
Compare
nixpkgs-ci
Bot
removed
the
2.status: merge conflict
Member
Author
I updated this PR exactly like in #447403 (comment). Like before, here is the relevant diff against the previous diff:
|
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
MattSturgeon
approved these changes
Jan 15, 2026
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I skimmed the diff very quickly again. No obvious issues.
Rebuild count isn't particularly relevant to NixOS modules, but only seeing two is still encouraging:
I'll run a nixpkgs-review just to be safe (not sure if nixpkgs-review-gha will be able to build tests.nixos-functions.nixos-test, but we'll see). EDIT: ah, it's blacklisted.
I aim to get this merged promptly before the inevitable conflicts reappear. If issues are found post-merge we can fix or revert as necessary.
Contributor
Built fine locally |
Contributor
|
This needs to be backported or else other backports are going to be difficult. |
Contributor
|
Backport failed for Please cherry-pick the changes locally and resolve any conflicts. git fetch origin release-25.11
git worktree add -d .worktree/backport-447403-to-release-25.11 origin/release-25.11
cd .worktree/backport-447403-to-release-25.11
git switch --create backport-447403-to-release-25.11
git cherry-pick -x a2ed7e8d882c2b9deba7b7c2cc8e1a97b29aa415 |
Contributor
|
@trueNAHO: Can you create a new PR for the release-25.11 branch, please? (I presume since it's auto-generated that it might be easier to do it that way than to cherry-pick and resolve conflicts.) |
Contributor
Good point. This applies equally to the other PRs in this series:
We asked for the initial PRs to be split for easier review, however I'm fine to review a single backport.
If the backport is made of 5 commits (freshly generated, but still tagged with |
Contributor
|
Sure, do whatever feels best 😃 |
Merged
13 tasks
Member
Author
I opened #480781.
Based on the following output, the other PRs were already merged prior to the $ for commit in \
b50da098117870e48cba6c110d290cb2a2dadf93 \
44998896c6a811fcc4021e8ca75243b5d53e605b \
6d1d15bb3610a98c8d6ba63e7e792cec53215227 \
c078ee646535e63a08f709d3f1b5d122407e6f12 \
d9335d5dd7057963bf0006432427e115b2825c4d
do
git merge-base --is-ancestor "$commit" release-25.11 || echo "$commit"
done
c078ee646535e63a08f709d3f1b5d122407e6f12
Are you referring to some general GitHub feature, or just #480781 (review)? I usually run something like the following locally: diff <(git show "$COMMIT_1") <(git show "$COMMIT_2") |
Contributor
I was refering to that review that our CI posts, yes. GitHub doesn't have any native features for inspection backports and comparing them to the original.
That's essentially what our CI does. It relies on the backport having a |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Related PRs intentionally split up to simplify review and merging:
Things done
passthru.tests.nixpkgs-reviewon this PR. See nixpkgs-review usage../result/bin/.Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.