treewide: general maintenance work

[NotAShelf]

Relatively small PR that introduces several improvements to Nix packaging, CI workflows, and configuration files. The main themes I've targeted today are to update the CI workflows for better reliability (i.e., remove a hostile workflow that insists on installing its own enterprise crap) in favor of a fully free and reliable one as well as reducing redundancies in the Nix packaging.

We now add anyrun-provider (re-exported in packages) to Anyrun's PATH, and use a simple .override for anyrun-with-all-plugins package. This centralizes some packaging and installation steps.

I've also went ahead and updated the formatter package for nix fmt. The previously valid nix fmt . is now discouraged, and is suggested to be replaced with wrappers like treefmt. I find this to be obsolte, however, as we can handle this much faster in-house without relying on a 3rd party wrapper.

Lastly I've formatted TOML files with Taplo, which is a simple and reliable formatter. We can also set up rustfmt with a configuration file if desirable.

Signed-off-by: NotAShelf [email protected]
Change-Id: I6a6a6964e304a7ecf0a8b0516643e980a827224e

[Kirottu]

Seems to be a whole lot of useful stuff, the HM module should be addressed but aside from that it should be good to go.

[Kirottu]

Since the provider is added to PATH here, it should probably not be overridden in the config in the provided HM module.

[NotAShelf]

Does the provider need to be specified in the configuration? If not, I'd like to remove it from the configuration.

I could maybe expose the provider used in the package as anyrun.passthru.anyrun-provider in case the user wants to access the it, but if we attempt to override the anyrun-provider in the argset via anyrun.override inside the HM module, we'll most likely cause binary cache misses- which would suck for the end user because of how long it takes to compile Rust... In the passthru method we can simply access the anyrun-provider used by the package, and always expect it to be exposed in passthru. This is mostly reliable, unless the user provides a very custom anyrun package that, e.g., does not have a passthru attribute but we can assert this case so it's fine.

Alternatively I can try to break packaging into two distinct variants as anyrun and anyrun-unwrapped, the latter not doing any wrapping and instead letting us do that in the HM module.

I'm more in favor of the first method, but let me know what you think.

[Kirottu]

It doesn't need to be a part of the config, as it will default to anyrun-provider, as in looking for it in PATH. I don't know enough about (proper) Nix packaging to really know how the provider should be linked to Anyrun proper though so I'll trust your judgement on that.