pkgsStatic.onetbb: mark unsupported

[shelvacu]

oneTBB can't be staticly linked.

This obsoletes #468506

This isn't a breaking change; pkgsStatic.onetbb already failed to build.

This allows building staticly linked nix! nix build .#pkgsStatic.nix

Things done

• Built on platform:
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS tests in nixos/tests.
  • Package tests at passthru.tests.
  • Tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test for functions and "core" functionality.
• Ran nixpkgs-review on this PR. See nixpkgs-review usage.
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files, usually in ./result/bin/.
• Nixpkgs Release Notes
  • Package update: when the change is major or breaking.
• NixOS Release Notes
  • Module addition: when adding a new NixOS module.
  • Module update: when the change is significant.
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md, pkgs/README.md, maintainers/README.md and other READMEs.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[shelvacu]

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review
Commit: 71dc2e7df310d90a3c738e423fdfc13b710a8d67

---

x86_64-linux

✅ 4 packages built:

• nixStatic
• nixStatic.dev
• nixStatic.doc
• nixStatic.man

[qzylinra]

Perhaps only need to disable TBB_TEST and check.

[shelvacu]

Perhaps only need to disable TBB_TEST and check.

I don't understand what you mean. Are there tests I can run? What's the command?

[uninsane]

#468552

i'd prefer to rewrite the fix in a way that's eligible for master (i.e. condition the new flags behind isStatic, so as to fix it without triggering any rebuilds for most users), or wait for the next staging -> master merge

uxlfoundation/oneTBB#1877

so it seems that linking onetbb statically is possible, but it exhibits different behavior such that applications are liable to crash unless they've specifically considered the case of being built against a static onetbb. so defaulting useTBB to false on static platforms seems like the right call.

setting badPlatforms on onetbb itself seems heavy-handed (that causes nix-build -A pkgsStatic.onetbb itself to complain, even though it can be used legitimately), but i can't think of any way to get better ergonomics that isn't significantly more involved.

so... this PR is at least a step in the right direction, i think

[nixpkgs-ci]

Successfully created backport PR for release-25.11:

• [Backport release-25.11] pkgsStatic.onetbb: mark unsupported #472293