Skip to content

Update the nixpkgs pin so the flake evaluates again - #19

Merged
tashian merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
carl/flake-lock-update
Aug 26, 2026
Merged

Update the nixpkgs pin so the flake evaluates again#19
tashian merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
carl/flake-lock-update

Conversation

@tashian

@tashian tashian commented Aug 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

nix build github:smallstep/nur#<anything> — along with nix run, nix profile install, and nix flake show — currently fails with Function called without required argument "tpm2-openssl". The lock pins nixpkgs from 2024-04-07, which predates tpm2-openssl; every step-agent derivation from 0.69.0 on requires it, and because flake.nix builds the packages output by filtering the entire version set, one unevaluable file poisons every attribute. Customers following the README never noticed because inputs.nixpkgs.follows overrides the lock, and CI never caught it because build.yml evaluates against live channel tarballs via NIX_PATH, not the flake lock — worth a follow-up check that evals the flake against its own lock.

Verified on aarch64-linux with the updated lock: nix flake show evaluates the full package set, nix build .#step-agent_0_69_0-rc3 builds and the binary reports step-agent/0.69.0-rc3, and the bare step-agent attribute still resolves to the newest stable (0.69.0).

The lock pointed at nixpkgs from 2024-04-07, which predates
tpm2-openssl. Every step-agent derivation from 0.69.0 on requires it,
and flake.nix builds the packages output by filtering the whole version
set, so one unevaluable file broke nix build/run/flake show for every
attribute when the repo's own lock was used. Customers following the
README were unaffected because inputs.nixpkgs.follows overrides the
lock.

CI never caught this: build.yml evaluates against live channel tarballs
via NIX_PATH, not the flake lock.
@tashian
tashian requested a review from dopey August 26, 2026 22:58
@tashian
tashian merged commit 2834e1f into main Aug 26, 2026
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants