| 26 Mar 2026 |
 emily | yes, above the top, in the sky, where all the blessings go! | 22:23:38 |
| *  raitobezarius thinks of latest ContraPoint's video on Dante's Divine Comedy | 22:25:42 |
 piegames | Really dynamic attrs are not the problem | 22:34:35 |
| piegames | The problem ist that rec syntax doesn't compose with any other language features, including dynamic attrs. For example, rec doesn't apply to dynamic attributes but does to all others | 22:35:17 |
 sterni | maybe we should fix that so we can enable them in let ;-) | 22:39:25 |
| 27 Mar 2026 |
 FireFly | ... with rec is a combination I never thought about, but indeed an utterly cursed one >.> | 00:25:36 |
 Lisanna | curious on the history behind this statement | 01:46:38 |
 QuadRadical (Ping) | What do you mean? | 01:50:10 |
| Lisanna | what has caused the discourse to not be liked | 01:50:39 |
| QuadRadical (Ping) | Oh, right, good question then | 01:51:37 |
|  dbdbc changed their display name from dbdbdb to dbdbc. | 09:44:10 |
| raitobezarius | Mostly, speaking for myself and those who share that feeling, many of us in the Lix core team are disinterested in the community spaces which are run by the NixOS Foundation and the related power structures because of the past inability of the various groups in-place to address concerns, needs and demands of some folks in the community (Anduril sponsorship, the moderation episode, etc.). Still, up to today, these spaces continues to be uninteresting to those who are familiar with who runs them and the (lack of) decisions that has been carrying over. | 11:55:13 |
 dinckelman | Pardon if this has already been addressed, but i'm interested in what the proposed solution for the deprecated nix features is. Built my flake today with 2.95, and it spit out 20 warns about the usage of the said features. The issue is that they're all nixpkgs, and therefore outside of my control | 21:01:01 |
| raitobezarius | Can your nixpkgs be upgraded? | 21:01:21 |
| dinckelman | this was already on master | 21:01:30 |
| raitobezarius | That's very surprising because we ensured nixpkgs would not start getting any of these deprecated features (not deeply familiar with the matter though) | 21:01:56 |
| raitobezarius | I have not been getting any warning for a long time now on various "modern" nixpkgs instances | 21:02:10 |
| raitobezarius | Are you sure you are not using an old pinned nixpkgs somewhere perhaps? | 21:02:19 |
| raitobezarius | (If you can share your Flakes, this can help debugging things as I can quickly check) | 21:02:53 |
| dinckelman | Unless it was from a flake input that i've not overwriten with my own nixpkgs, i definitely didn't pin anything myself. I'll open a thread with my flake and the output log in a moment | 21:03:48 |
| dinckelman | but even then i usually build from unstable | 21:03:57 |
| raitobezarius | Thanks a lot | 21:04:05 |
 Emma [it/its] | i have been getting a lot warns myself | 21:05:15 |
| Emma [it/its] | but a lot of them are also me just absolutely mis-writing my configs lol | 21:05:37 |
 Zoe Z | When a nix build succeeds and created a gcroot, is the path marked valid first or is the gcroot created first? | 21:06:01 |
| raitobezarius | the gcroot is created first OTOH | 21:07:10 |
| raitobezarius | wait | 21:07:19 |
| raitobezarius | which gcroot type are you talking about? | 21:07:23 |
| raitobezarius | temporary roots are created very early on | 21:07:27 |
| raitobezarius | permanent roots are created quite late | 21:07:30 |
