rio: Restrict test execution inside nixosTests for Linux devices

[otavio]

---

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.

[NickCao]

This affects practically every package with a linked nixos test, can we find a solution for them all?

E.g. make nixos tests work on darwin, nothing stop us from running qemu there.

[otavio]

This would be for sure the best solution, however I don't have access for the Darwin. So, I believe that someone using this operating system will need to work on that.

Meanwhile, I think that this should not forbid the value of this pull request, as this solves a real problem and other derivations do the same already.

[NickCao]

Meanwhile, I think that this should not forbid the value of this pull request, as this solves a real problem and other derivations do the same already.

Could you open a tracking issue (if there isn't one already) and link to it in a comment. So we can just grep and replace all the occurrences of this hack when the underlying issue is fixed.

[NickCao]

The PR that introduced this problem: #303597

[otavio]

@NickCao Honestly, I don't have too much detail about the Darwin issue, so it would be better if someone with more involvement in Darwin can report that. I'm totally fine to update the code and the commit log to mention this issue so it can be searched in the future.

Don't get me wrong, I'm fine in reporting issues, just I don't have the details to be able to do a proper issue with helpful information.

@mattpolzin Could you help on that?

[NickCao]

Also cc @wegank

[mattpolzin]

Sure, I can write up a ticket. I actually didn't realize this was related to only recently starting to run the nixos tests on darwin at all; thanks for the link Nick.

[EDIT] as indicated in the GitHub feed for this PR as well, the ticket I opened can be found here: #345825

[otavio]

@mattpolzin I have applied the changes to this pull request. Could you review it?

[mattpolzin]

Thanks. We may as well let the aarch64-darwin test play out (though clearly things are being skipped as desired for the already-finished x86_64-darwin passthru tests) before merging.