xpra: 4.4.6 -> 5.0.9

[aqrln]

Description of changes

Update Xpra from 4.4.6 to 5.0.8.

Tested:

• Connecting from a remote client on macOS via ssh and running apps in seamless mode
• Running Xpra itself on NixOS: GIU works, running apps from the same host in seamless mode but in Xpra's X server works
• Running xpra start and xpra shadow: couldn't reproduce the issue reported by @kashw2 in Update request: xpra 4.4.6 → 5.0.3 #270566 (comment) on my NixOS 24.05.git.f0154a9104b0 aarch64.

Not tested:

• Desktop mode
• Shadow mode aside from just starting the server and then stopping it
• Xpra display manager NixOS module

TODO: check the changelog and see if there are any breaking changes or incompatibilities in the major release. Add a release notes entry if necessary.

Closes: #270566

cc maintainers @offlinehacker @numinit @mvnetbiz

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[aqrln]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 303930 run on aarch64-linux 1

4 packages built:

• ib-controller
• run-scaled
• xpra
• xpra.dist

[aqrln]

ping maintainers @numinit @offlinehacker @mvnetbiz

[kashw2]

Works for me, can't find any traces of the error I previously mentioned

[hxtmdev]

Looks like the tarballs are gone, probably as part of Xpra-org/xpra#2967

@aqrln can you add
0001-Replace-xpra-src-with-GitHub.zip (GitHub did not allow .patch)

-  src = fetchurl {
-    url = "https://xpra.org/src/${pname}-${version}.tar.xz";
-    hash = "sha256-np9g8F5PN4eB3VpuxMu/rtC2dJ+zXDhs9g9n/sy2iVY=";
+  src = fetchFromGitHub {
+    owner = "Xpra-org";
+    repo = pname;
+    rev = "v${version}";
+    sha256 = "sha256-geGgQUlUUT/kJ+0KxpHjcHyxOeZmgzka4MTew9kzsCk=";

to your branch or would you prefer a new PR?

I successfully tested xpra start with a Firefox window to x86_64-linux NixOS.

This PR adds some type hints in the patches where there were none before (and only for some parameters) but otherwise LGTM 👍🏻

[aqrln]

@hxtmdev

This PR adds some type hints in the patches where there were none before

This is just the code updated from upstream (the surrounding code in the patches needed to be updated otherwise they couldn't be applied due to conflicts). The actual content of the patches (i.e. modifications in them) didn't change. It's hard to read a diff of a diff so it's confusing indeed.

I basically just applied the old patches, fixed the conflicts and ran git diff.

[aqrln]

Xpra 6.0.1 already exists but 5.0.8 is the last in the 5.x line. Should we aim at updating to 6.0.1 right away in this PR or should we merge the 4.x to 5.x update first, and then update to 6.x in a separate PR?

[hxtmdev]

then update to 6.x in a separate PR

I'd prefer the latter, then there is a commit with v5, binary cache etc.

Also v5 is LTS with support planned until 2026. Not that it should keep us from updating but it sounds like a handy version to have easily accessible for troubleshooting.

[emilazy]

This needs updating for #324179. Our current Xpra server version is incompatible with the official 6.x clients, so it’d be great to get an update.

[aqrln]

@emilazy done!

[emilazy]

Thanks. I understand not wanting to package 6.x in this PR, but could you bump to 5.0.9?

[aqrln]

sure, will do

[aqrln]

@emilazy done. 5.0.9 builds successfully but I haven't tested anything more than ./result/bin/xpra --version so far.

[hxtmdev]

I just updated the server side of my setup. Could successfully use it for my seamless workflow from Debian stable official v6.1-r0 client.

Have not checked the aspects regarding #324179 though.

[emilazy]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 303930 run on x86_64-linux 1

2 packages failed to build:

• xpraWithNvenc
• xpraWithNvenc.dist

3 packages built:

• run-scaled
• xpra
• xpra.dist

xpraWithNvenc was already broken, so this looks good to me. A couple final nits; sorry for not catching these earlier!

[aqrln]

@emilazy thanks for the review, just pushed a new commit

[emilazy]

Thanks! Glancing at their changelog it looks like 6.x broke compatibility but not 5.x, so I think we can merge this as‐is.