Skip to content

Fix bug in link validation #3237

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

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Fix bug in link validation #3237

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

edsko
Copy link
Contributor

@edsko edsko commented Mar 20, 2016

When we are choosing to link a package (pickLink), it is possible that that package was already linked (because its reverse dependencies got linked). Thus, this requires a merge of link groups: it is not correct to simply add the package into the target link group.

This fixes #2842. Thank you @grayjay for yet another very high quality bug report! All this independent goals/linking is all very new so it's really great to have somebody like you taking such a detailed look at it. Much appreciated!

Pinging @kosmikus and @dcoutts .

grayjay and others added 2 commits March 19, 2016 15:45
When we are choosing to link a package (`pickLink`), it is possible that that
package was _already_ linked (because its reverse dependencies got linked).
Thus, this requires a merge of link groups: it is not correct to simply add the
package into the target link group.

This fixes #2842.
@grayjay
Copy link
Collaborator

grayjay commented Mar 21, 2016

@edsko Thanks!

I found this and #2834 while testing my changes with quickcheck. I wanted to clean up the tests and contribute them, but they are really slow. Would solver quickcheck tests be useful, even if they are too slow to run on Travis?

@23Skidoo
Copy link
Member

@grayjay I think that having them in the repo (even if they were disabled by default) could be useful.

@edsko
Copy link
Contributor Author

edsko commented Mar 21, 2016

Yup, I agree with @23Skidoo . That would definitely be a good thing to have!

@grayjay
Copy link
Collaborator

grayjay commented Mar 21, 2016

Great! I'll work on a PR.

@dcoutts
Copy link
Contributor

dcoutts commented Mar 28, 2016

I've merged these patches to the nix-local-build branch (along with all the other recent solver PRs).

@grayjay
Copy link
Collaborator

grayjay commented Mar 29, 2016

I opened a PR for the quickcheck tests: #3245

@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor

ezyang commented Apr 1, 2016

@23Skidoo Would you like me to merge these PRs?

@23Skidoo
Copy link
Member

23Skidoo commented Apr 1, 2016

@ezyang If @kosmikus doesn't/won't object, then sure.

@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor

ezyang commented Apr 1, 2016

Oh, @kosmikus has said that he will try to review before the release date; I'll hold off then.

@edsko
Copy link
Contributor Author

edsko commented Apr 23, 2016

This has been merged into and subsumed by #3357 .

@edsko edsko closed this Apr 23, 2016
@edsko edsko deleted the pr/fix2842 branch April 23, 2016 03:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

--independent-goals can produce an invalid install plan
6 participants