Change:
valgrind = callPackage ../development/tools/analysis/valgrind { inherit (buildPackages.darwin) xnu bootstrap_cmds; }; <del> valgrind-light = res.valgrind.override { gdb = null; }; </del> <ins> valgrind-light = (res.valgrind.override { gdb = null; }).overrideAttrs (oldAttrs: { meta.description = "${oldAttrs.meta.description} (without GDB)"; }); </ins> qcachegrind = libsForQt5.callPackage ../development/tools/analysis/qcachegrind { };

Discussion:
[valgrind-3.23.0]: "valgrind-3.23.0" [vg]: "Default-channel" [vg-nix]: "Nix package source for valgrind" [mrs]: Package name: valgrind-light Latest released version: [valgrind-3.23.0] <!-- --<!-- Type the name of your package and try to find an open pull request for the package If you find an open pull request, you can review it! There's a high chance that you'll have the new version right away while helping the community! --Searching for [valgrind][vg] on shows as well as . But both these look exactly same except for their package name. and the reason for these being different packages is not at all communicated. Further looking in: the "Source" button for both refers to the exact [same file][vg-nix] i.e. maybe the differences in light/normal version does NOT matter for Nix searching the [MRs], it seems that: several other things use valgrind-light in their build process, and their build process might be used outside of nix too, where the light/normal distinction matters and the exists only to cater to those packages If above observation is correct, then it should be said in description (of say ) that: Or else, if there is some other reason for existence of both these, then that should be put in the corresponding description. Or else, if used to exist for some reason, but is no longer relevant anymore, then it should be removed. [latest Nixpkgs manual]: [latest NixOS manual]: [nixpkgs-source]: [nixos-source]: [open documentation issues]: [open documentation pull requests]: <!-- make sure this issue is not redundant or obsolete --- [x] Not Applicable checked [latest Nixpkgs manual] ([source][nixpkgs-source]) and [latest NixOS manual] ([source][nixos-source]) [x] checked [open documentation issues] for possible duplicates [x] checked [open documentation pull requests] for possible solutions [x] Checked the [nixpkgs pull requests][mrs] Notify maintainers/last updaters <!-- If the result shows no maintainers, tag the person that last updated the package.

-- Note for maintainers: Please tag this issue in your PR. [reaction]: [issues you find important]: Add a :+1: [reaction] to [issues you find important].
Looking at the current definition of the only difference is no hardcoding as a dependency ( is usually not needed for non-interactive use like tests):
ohww, didn't know there's one more thing modifying the package description. [lldb-mi-repo]: "lldb-mi" [nix-pkgs]: "" [kdePackages.kdevelop]: "kdePackages.kdevelop" so, would that be useful to someone who's not using otherwise? as i might have been that "someone", had the <tt[lldb-mi][lldb-mi-repo]</tt(for use with <tt[kdePackages.kdevelop]</tt) been available in [nix-pkgs] :smiley: :laughing:
Well can override the too, that would resolve this issue.