{SDL1, SDL_compat}: migrate to by-name

[AndersonTorres]

Description of changes

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/)
• 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 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.

[AndersonTorres]

Related: #274836

[emilazy]

I’d rather drop SDL1 in favour of the compatibility library than refactor it.

[peterhoeg]

I’d rather drop SDL1 in favour of the compatibility library than refactor it.

I don't have any real numbers to back this up and my info is at least a year old, but there were problems in the past with SDL_compat breaking applications when swapping it in for SDL1. I don't know how big a problem it is and I appreciate that that number will continue to go down but for now, I am very much in favour of retaining both. That being said, we should absolutely try migrating as many as possible to SDL_compat.

[AndersonTorres]

If you're having trouble, ping @NixOS/nixpkgs-vet

I do not even know what is happening here...

[AndersonTorres]

By running it locally, SDL_compat zero-rebuilds.
Given that this PR is mass-rebuilding, I will try to split it.

[AndersonTorres]

Hey!
Why giving name s for the patches caused mass rebuilds?

[philiptaron]

Hey! Why giving name s for the patches caused mass rebuilds?

nix-diff will tell you. That being said, it's not so bad to target staging and call it a day if you like the change you've made in the PR.

[AndersonTorres]

Since @pbsds is dealing with the SDL1 "upgrade" (basically, packaging HEAD) at #274836, doing this particular cleanup is not worth the hassle.