Fix issue with build using flake system in issue #747

[redanaheim]

See issue #747

Overview of changes:

• Added two lines to gitignore
• Removed vscode:prepublish script from package.json because it causes the flake build script to attempt (and fail) to install the yarn dependencies using yarn when building the .vsix
• Added yarn.nix files generated using yarn2nix that allow building the yarn dependencies using nix
• Added correct version coq derivations to nativeBuildInputs for each version of vscoq-language-server so that coqc is accessible during the language server build process
• Added to buildPhase of vscoq-client: first build UI using scripts in package.json through yarn, then webpack the whole thing, vsce package, then move the .vsix to the bin folder.

One possible problem: I changed the commit the coq-master dependency is derived from, which (according to the comment) may break something in the CI workflow. I'm not sure what the pinned version is, but the latest commits on coq/coq don't build with the flake system.

These changes were tested on aarch64-darwin (MacOS 14.1, nix 2.20.3) and aarch64-linux (nixOS, nix 2.18.1).

[gares]

Added yarn.nix files generated using yarn2nix that allow building the yarn dependencies using nix

Thanks!

Is there a way to run this tool in CI and check that the .nix is up to date wrt the yarn one? I'm not a nix user, neither is Romain AFAIK, so CI better be rock solid on nix, or we won't notice these issues timely.

[redanaheim]

Is there a way to run this tool in CI and check that the .nix is up to date wrt the yarn one?

Yeah, using the following command will just create a file called new_yarn.nix using the yarn.lock in the current directory (assuming nix is available at the relevant point in CI):

nix-shell -p yarn2nix --run "yarn2nix > new_yarn.nix"

Then, you could compare hashes with the committed file (yarn.nix) and error if they're not the same.

Alternatively, you could overwrite the yarn.nix with that same command, which would produce an error when building the flake because flake.lock would be out of date if the contents of yarn.nix aren't the same. That said, I'm not sure if the flake is actually built in the CI. It seems like only nix develop is used.

[rtetley]

Removing this causes the publish-extension CI job to fail. Maybe we can just add a yarn run package step to the CI, before the relevant job ?

[rtetley]

Thanks again for you contribution :-)

[redanaheim]

Maybe we can just add a yarn run package step to the CI

Yeah, that's kind of what I was envisioning. Seems like that's the only reason CI failed

[rtetley]

Took the liberty of attempting a fix

[rtetley]

Argh, fixed the wrong file... Also realised retrospectively that it would have been more polite to ask for permission before pushing to the main branch of your fork. Would you mind if I push the fix on the right file @redanaheim ?

[redanaheim]

@rtetley No yeah it's fine go ahead, I didn't even know you could do that lol

[rtetley]

Haha yeah, you can opt out of it when you create the PR afaik

[redanaheim]

@rtetley @gares do you want me to try to implement the CI check for whether each yarn.nix is up to date? I'm thinking

nix-shell -p yarn2nix --run "yarn2nix > new_yarn.nix"
diff --brief new_yarn.nix yarn.nix

run in each directory with a yarn.nix.

[rtetley]

@redanaheim sounds good ! Please do :-) I'm really not that much of a nix expert...

[rtetley]

Okay finally looks like this should work. One little nitpick: the PIN_COQ needs to track the master branch of coq, it allows for coq developers to do PRs which keep the language server up to date with the latest coq api. What is the issue with the old pin ? It was probably currently not up to date.

[redanaheim]

What is the issue with the old pin ? It was probably currently not up to date.

@rtetley There is no issue, I changed it on my own fork to be the latest version that builds with flakes. I can revert it back to the version currently on main if you'd like.

[rtetley]

What is the issue with the old pin ? It was probably currently not up to date.

@rtetley There is no issue, I changed it on my own fork to be the latest version that builds with flakes. I can revert it back to the version currently on main if you'd like.

Ah okay cool ! Nah that sounds fine ! Thanks !