Closed srid closed 1 year ago
Can we use the same type as a flake's apps.X.program
for consistency?
@Kranzes How would you write the following if exec
was of the same type as that of app.X.program
(which appears to allow executable path or derivation, but not script)?
i would use a derivation, writeShellScript or something similar. Also make it buildable by CI.
I don't think I want to give up on the convenience syntax of exec = "echo Hello";
for this module.
make it buildable by CI
We have #23 for that.
For a config like,
mission-control generates
, treefmt
. But we want it to be, fmt
instead.This should also incidentally fix the conflict with an attrset key being the same as one of the shell tools in PATH.
Test in https://github.com/srid/haskell-template/commit/fb9634b22b50f21b196236366c3fdafa967d13c3#diff-206b9ce276ab5971a2489d75eb1b12999d4bf3843b7988cbe8d687cfde61dea0R55