ollama: only set updateScript for ollama, not ollama-{rocm,cuda}

[abysssol]

Description of changes

Attempt to prevent passthru.updateScript from triggering a bot update of ollama-rocm and ollama-cuda. Since ollama, ollama-rocm, and ollama-cuda are all defined in the same file (only specialized with arguments/overrides), only ollama should be explicitly updated.

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.

[adamcstephens]

Should be fine. Could also compare pname != "ollama" as the others are renamed.

[mweinelt]

Nixpkgs-update supports a skiplist: https://github.com/nix-community/nixpkgs-update/blob/d55f27272f33975d67b13be9fa241cdea297dfb1/src/Skiplist.hs#L47

[abysssol]

@mweinelt Thank you for letting me know. So, to be clear, I should create a pull request on that repository to add ollama-rocm and ollama-cuda, right? And this PR is unnecessary (or maybe ineffective?) and should be closed?

[mweinelt]

If the only thing you worry about is r-ryantm, then yes.