openvsp: init at 3.40.1

[Kek5chen]

The openvsp software package for nixpkgs.

Resolves #349534

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.

[Kek5chen]

uhm.. i'm pretty sure my package is properly formatted.. not according to nixfmt but comparing it to other packages... is nixfmt really the defacto or is it fine the way it is?

Also some thoughts about my custom phases:

OpenVSP comes packaged for Ubuntu and RPM based and on normal linux file structures it puts all its packages into /opt. I just extract the ones that I want. It's also a bit finicky because of it's urgent needs to package dynamic libraries. Any suggestions are appreciated.

Edit: Ah, finally figured it out while packaging another package. using nixfmt is not sufficient. using nixfmt-rfc-style is the way.. that's a bit weird, but alright.