| 26 Jan 2026 |
 Arian | The docs say “Lix will fall back to building from source if a binary substitute fails. “ so I expect —no-fallback to disable that. But maybe i am misreading the docs? What does “fails” mean here? Maybe 404 is not a “Failure” ? | 16:44:34 |
| Arian | * The docs say “Lix will fall back to building from source if a binary substitute fails. “ so I expect —no-fallback to disable building if something is not found in cache and just bail out. But maybe i am misreading the docs? What does “fails” mean here? Maybe 404 is not a “Failure” ? | 16:44:55 |
 aloisw | Indeed uncached path is not a failure. If you do not want builds that sounds more like the job of max-jobs = 0. | 17:18:20 |
|  QuadRadical (Ping) @ FOSDEM changed their display name from QuadRadical (Ping) to QuadRadical (Ping) @ FOSDEM. | 21:19:04 |
 Winter | once again running into system-units (+ etc maybe) taking a weirdly long time to go from building …system-units.drv to the next (building …etc.drv) while building a NixOS system. anyone else? | 22:35:07 |
| Winter | I’m making very small changes that only affect config files | 22:35:19 |
| Winter | So I don’t think it’s collateral | 22:35:27 |
 raitobezarius | how many drvs in the dependency graph? | 23:36:15 |
| raitobezarius | building the NixOS system on a NixOS system or? | 23:36:24 |
| raitobezarius | aren't you affected by a form of https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/479442 ? | 23:36:53 |
| raitobezarius | also if you rebuild that .drv using --rebuild, are you reproducing that long delay? | 23:37:40 |
| 27 Jan 2026 |
| Winter | I tried that, didn’t appear to but I’ll need to do more tests | 01:04:50 |
| Winter | perhaps? 👀 | 01:04:59 |
| Winter | yes (wait, would that matter vs. any other Linux?) | 01:05:11 |
| raitobezarius | other Linux systems may have weird LSM that slow down things | 01:05:28 |
| raitobezarius | or you may have an enterprise software EDR that slow down things | 01:05:35 |
| raitobezarius | * or you may have an enterprise software EDR/security that slow down things | 01:05:40 |
| Winter | gotcha (i don’t, to clarify( | 01:05:48 |
| Winter | * | 01:05:52 |
| Winter | * | 01:05:56 |
| raitobezarius | yeah, just trying to rule out foreign reasons | 01:05:58 |
| Winter | will collect some better timings tomorrow | 01:06:01 |
| Winter | thanks 🫡 | 01:06:05 |
| raitobezarius | np! | 01:06:09 |
|  dish [Fox/It/She] left the room. | 01:15:41 |
|  whispers [& it/fae] changed their display name from whispers (it/fae) to whispers [& it/fae]. | 02:51:41 |
 vczf | :doc lib.trivial.pipe produces no documentation in nix repl, but the other functions there work fine.
There’s what looks to me like properly written documentation in <nixpkgs>/lib/trivial.nix yet it doesn’t show up in repl.
This is the same for lix and cppnix latest. Anybody know if this is likely a bug in nix command implementation or rather in nixpkgs? | 05:55:01 |
 m | I've installed NixOS at some point last year influenced by someone I follow. Their installation included flakes. Since then, I've read so many things about flakes having been experimental for ages as well as controversial.
What's the general take within the Lix community? Would I just be better off? | 08:10:44 |
 K900 | It doesn't really matter | 08:11:15 |
| K900 | If flakes work for you, use flakes | 08:11:19 |
