This is broken (again). In previous unstable, explicitly including the driver,
drivers = [ pkgs.canon-cups-ufr2 ];
worked (i.e., the driver built and installed fine), allowing full printer functionality. That’s now gone south:
Running phase: unpackPhase
@nix { "action": "setPhase", "phase": "unpackPhase" }
unpacking source archive /nix/store/5v3gg0srx7lc2k59y24pwlpmhjyfvl5i-linux-UFRII-drv-v600-m17n-00.tar.gz
/nix/store/wdap4cr3bnm685f27y9bb6q5b6q18msl-coreutils-9.5/bin/install -c pdftocpca '/nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib/cups/filter'
make[2]: Leaving directory '/build/linux-UFRII-drv-v600-m17n/cnrdrvcups-lb-6.00/pdftocpca'
make[1]: Leaving directory '/build/linux-UFRII-drv-v600-m17n/cnrdrvcups-lb-6.00/pdftocpca'
installPhase completed in 2 minutes 9 seconds
Running phase: dropIconThemeCache
@nix { "action": "setPhase", "phase": "dropIconThemeCache" }
Running phase: fixupPhase
@nix { "action": "setPhase", "phase": "fixupPhase" }
checking for references to /build/ in /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00...
patching script interpreter paths in /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00
stripping (with command strip and flags -S -p) in /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/bin
ERROR: noBrokenSymlinks: the symlink /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib/libuictlufr2r.so.1 points to a missing target /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib/lib>
ERROR: noBrokenSymlinks: the symlink /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib/libuictlufr2r.so points to a missing target /nix/store/nwxj5wdhp35b2niwl6xw4qapsngbkfnn-canon-cups-ufr2-6.00/lib/libui>
ERROR: noBrokenSymlinks: found 2 dangling symlinks and 0 reflexive symlinks
Canon’s Linux current driver package (UFR II/UFRII LT Printer Driver for Linux V6.00) installed and worked previously, and has not changed since it was released 09.13.24. I will check again in a few weeks, but this is frustrating: I don’t see why it’s failing to build now if it built successfully before, and doesn’t depend on anything it doesn’t provide itself. How can symlinked targets be missing if they weren’t missing before? Alternatively, were such errors ignored previously, and noBrokenSymlinks a new (more stringent) build rule? I greatly appreciate any insight or suggestions.